A lessee sought damages from the lessor due to works carried out in the building as part of the TAMA 38 project.
The Court rejected the claim and held that the lessee knowingly entered into the lease agreement and did not act to reduce his alleged damages. A lessee is not allowed to contend discrepancy of the property when he knew about the discrepancy at the time of signing the lease agreement. One who breaches a contract is not liable for damages that the harmed party could, by reasonable means, have prevented or reduced. Here, the lease agreement specifically stated that the apartment and the building were undergoing a process of renovation and upgrading as part of the TAMA 38 project. The rent was even reduced because of this and the lessee was even given the option to notify the lessor of evacuation at any stage. Therefore, the lessee entered into the lease agreement with his eyes open despite the expected discrepancies. The lessee chose to stay in the apartment and only at the end of the contract chose to raise his claims and demands towards the lessor in connection with the TAMA project, thereby he did not act to reduce the alleged 'damage' and has nothing but himself to blame.