§ 1. Mr. George Wallaceasked the Attorney-General how many housing possession cases have been dealt with at Dartford County Court within the last 12 months to the nearest effective date; how many verdicts were given in favour of owners; and how many were given in favour of tenants.
§ The Attorney-General (Sir Hartley Shawcross)During the last 12 months, 517 actions for possession have been heard in the Dartford County Court; judgment for the plaintiff was given in 473 cases, and for the defendant in 22 cases; the remaining cases were adjourned or settled. In a very high proportion of the cases in which the plaintiff obtained judgment the operation of the order for possession was suspended for a period ranging between one month and six months to afford the tenant time to find other accommodation, and it was 1972 only necessary to issue warrants for possession in 48 cases.
§ Mr. WallaceIs my hon. and learned Friend aware that we are given to understand that hardship is the deciding factor in all such cases, and that many verdicts in favour of owners have imposed great hardships?
§ The Attorney-GeneralThere is always hardship on both sides in these unfortunate cases. This jurisdiction is one which involves the very difficult discretion of weighing the conflicting claims and hardships of the owner—a man who, very often, has just returned from the Forces, and needs his house for his own occupation—and of the tenant who has perhaps secured the house during the war. As I have said, there is always hardship on both sides, and it would be quite improper for me to comment in any way on the manner in which the learned judge has exercised his discretion in these cases.
§ Mr. GallacherIn view of the many cases which have been decided in favour of the owner, would the Attorney-General consider altering the law, so that local justices would be able to cut the head off the owner instead of cutting the feet from under the tenant?
§ The Attorney-GeneralThat is another question.