§ 56. Mr. DINGLE FOOTasked the Minister of Health whether his attention has been called to the recent decision of the Court of Appeal in Heginbottom v. Watts, laying it down that, as a result of the Rent and Mortgage Interest Restriction (Amendment) Act, 1933, the onus lies upon the tenant of a dwelling-house to show that the house is still controlled, even though the rateable value of the house is less than £20; and whether he will consider the advisability of amending the law in order to obviate the difficulties that will otherwise arise?
§ Sir K. WOODI have seen a report of the case in question. As at present advised I do not consider that any action is called for.
§ Mr. FOOTDoes not the right hon. Gentleman appreciate that in many cases this will be an absolutely impossible burden for the tenant to shoulder, since he cannot know the history of a house before he takes it, and does he not appreciate that in a large number of cases this will utterly destroy the protection it was intended to give by the Rent Acts?
§ Sir K. WOODPerhaps the hon. Member had better wait and see whether any of the things which he anticipates do happen.
§ Mr. FOOTIs it the intention of the right hon. Gentleman to wait until the mischief is done before taking any action?
§ Sir K. WOODNo, but I think we had better have some general view of the position.