§ 34. Mr. Sorensenasked the Attorney- General whether his attention has been drawn to a recent county court decision which held that a man conscripted into an industry could not receive the same protection respecting the occupation of a house as a conscripted Service man; and whether, in view of this anomaly, he will take steps to secure that whether a man serves in the Armed Forces or is transferred from his normal work to work of 575 national importance he will receive the same protection respecting house occupation?
§ The Solicitor-General (Sir William Jowitt)I have been asked to reply. I understand that the case to which my hon. Friend refers related to an occupier who was not a tenant in the legal sense and that the court did not decide that such an occupier would, if he had been a person conscripted into the Armed Forces, have enjoyed a protection which is not available to persons conscripted into industry. I am not aware of any legislation now in force which makes such a discrimination.
§ Mr. SorensenWill my right hon. and learned Friend consider whether anomalies of this character do not exist, and, if they do, will he consider removing them?
§ Sir W. JowittI am not aware of any discrimination existing in the law to-day between the two sets of cases.