§ MR. T. M. HEALY (Longford, N.)asked Mr. Attorney General for Ireland, How soon the Land Commissioners hope 451 to frame Rules under the new Land Law (Ireland) Act; is it the fact that, under the Leaseholders' Clause, it will be possible for a landlord to refrain at the time of the prescribed application from making any objections to the order breaking a lease, but may afterwards, on the hearing of the fair rent application, after the lease has been set aside, raise any "exclusion" point, so that, if the latter be successful, the tenant will neither have the benefit of the Act nor the protection of his lease; will a rule be framed, prescribing that any legal objections as to grounds of exclusion (such as to sub-letting) existing at the time of the proscribed application, shall only be cognizable if raised before the making of the order determining the lease; and, will the Land Commissioners also consider whether, on the analogy of their adoption of suggestions of the Lords Committee of 1882–3, compelling tenants to give certain notices to the landlord, &c, a Rule could be framed requiring prior notice of legal objections excluding holdings from the Act, and invalidating objections sprung at the hearing without notice having been served?
§ THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. GIBSON) () Liverpool, WaltonThe Land Commission forthwith on receiving copy of the Act proceeded to frame Rules under Sections 1 and 2, and they have prepared, sealed, and issued two Rules under Sections 1 and 2. They will consider what further Rules may be necessary. In my view of the Act, the application under Section 1 will never be made unless the tenant intends forthwith to apply for a fair rent. The application mentioned in the first paragraph of Section 1 is only, I think, formal evidence of election on the tenant's part; and the section does not require any formal judicial act determining the lease as a preliminary condition to the fixing of a fair rent. The difficulty suggested by the 2nd paragraph of the Question does not, I think, arise. If the tenant is not entitled to apply, and his application for a fair rent is refused on the ground that his case does not come within the Act, his lease would not be, I think, affected. It is desirable, as far as possible, to lessen costs and avoid the expense and delay of two hearings when one would be sufficient. The Land Commissioners frame 452 Rules on their own authority, and will, no doubt, consider the suggestions made, and take any action they may deem necessary.
§ MR. T. M. HEALYasked, would it not be possible for the landlord to refrain, at the time of the prescribed application, from making any objections to the order breaking a lease, and then afterwards, when the tenant applied for a fair rent, point out a flaw in his title of sub-letting, and thus deprive him of the benefit of the Act?
§ MR. GIBSONsaid, as he understood the section, the application need not be followed by a judicial act. In his opinion, the application itself was sufficient. When the tenant made his application to the Court, and then applied to have a fair rent fixed, both matters would be before the Court, and the Court would deal with the whole matter. That was his view of the section; but it did not, of course, bind the Land Commissioners, who were the parties responsible for the framing of these Rules.
§ MR. T. M. HEALYasked, would it be possible to see the Rules before the Vote for the Commissioners was taken?
§ MR. GIBSONsaid, he had been furnished with a copy of the Rules by the Land Commissioners, and he should be glad to lot the hon. and learned Member see it.