HC Deb 26 June 1959 vol 607 cc1649-50

Motion made, and Question proposed, That the Clause stand part of the Bill.

The Solicitor-General

The only way in which I could induce the hon. and learned Members for Leicester, North-East (Sir L. Ungoed-Thomas) and Liverpool, Edge Hill (Mr. A. J. Irvine) to put their names to my Amendment to leave out Clause 4 was to put down an Amendment on the Order Paper which was out of order. But since the effect is so salutary, I now ask the Committee not to agree that this Clause should stand part of the Bill.

During the Second Reading debate I explained what this Clause was meant to do, but I must indicate the difficulties which have arisen. When this Bill becomes law it will still be possible to prevent the adverse acquisition of light against one's land by agreement which must be in writing and signed. It looked tempting to get rid of the danger that an agreement of that kind, which would not be required to be registered or publicised, might not meet the eye of a purchaser and result in hardship to him. So we thought that we would make an attempt to register such agreements. But representations which have reached us since the Bill left another place, in particular from the Law Society, which for many reasons is entitled to great respect—particularly in this case, because it knows all about the matter—indicate that it would prove in practice to be unsatisfactory and unworkable. For that reason, we ask the Committee to leave out the Clause.

The points are that first, we have been able only to make the Clause relate to future agreements, so that the protection will in any case not be complete, because otherwise people would have to undertake the most dreadful searchings through old deeds to see what was involved. Secondly, regarding even future agreements, as the Committee will know, it is not the practice nowadays to make separate agreements about light and air. The relevant provisions for such agreements are found in conveyances or leases and it would be quite impracticable to put the whole conveyance or lease on the Register. A scheme for putting a bit of it only on the Register would be equally unworkable. Also we must not overcrowd the Register and it is common practice in the sale of building plots nowadays to include agreements or consents of this kind.

In the circumstances, therefore, we think, however well-intentioned we were in including the Clause in the Bill, we must ask the Committee now to delete it.

Question put and negatived.

Clause 5 ordered to stand part of the Bill.