HC Deb 20 January 1964 vol 687 cc706-8
34 . Sir B. Janner

asked the Attorney-General whether he will take steps to make it compulsory for all proceedings to obtain possession of tied cottages to be instituted and tried in the county courts with a view to avoiding the obligation on the High Court to hear any applications in this regard.

The Attorney-General (Sir John Hobson)

Legislation would be required to alter the long-standing rule that the High Court and the county court have concurrent jurisdiction in actions for possession at common law. My noble Friend the Lord Chancellor is aware that there is some concern about the hardship which may be caused to tenants of tied cottages if proceedings are commenced in the High Court, and consultations about the situation are taking place between his Department and the other Departments concerned.

Sir B. Janner

While thanking the right hon. and learned Gentleman for that reply in respect of some steps which are being taken, may I ask whether he is aware of the terrible hardship being caused because judgment may go against a person in the High Court whereas if his case were taken in the county court the judge at least would be able to weigh up the hardships on either side and see that a man is not thrown on the streets at the end of two or three weeks? This is very important, and it requires immediate attention. Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman say that the inquiry will take place very shortly?

The Attorney-General

My noble Friend is, of course, aware of that problem, and I can assure the hon. Gentleman that my noble Friend is active and will act promptly in the consultations he is now to have, but I ought not to hold out any hopes one way or the other. The problem is fully realised and the Government will see what can be done about it.

Mr. Hilton

Is the right hon. and learned Gentleman aware that a tied cottage in agriculture is often a special problem? Is he aware that if an employer uses the High Court procedure he does not even have to prove that it is reasonable for him to have possession of the house? Would the right hon. and learned Gentleman not agree that it would be far more equitable if these cases were to be tried in the county courts, where reasonableness has to be proved? Finally, would he and his colleagues try to make sure that no worker is evicted from a tied cottage till suitable alternative accommodation is provided?

The Attorney-General

Of course, that difficulty is realised. On the other hand, when an action for possession is started in any court it is not apparent on the face of the proceedings that they are in respect of a tied cottage. This is one of the problems. The removal of all actions for possession from the jurisdiction of the High Court would be a very radical step and might affect a large number of other cases where no question of a tied cottage is involved. This is part of the problem.

Sir B. Janner

Is not the Attorney-General aware of the fact that an affidavit has to be sworn, and that in the event of an affidavit being sworn it could be pointed out that it is in respect of a tied cottage? This is the reason why an order has to be applied for. Could he not, to tide over the position, as my hon. Friend has suggested, make some provision whereby a tied cottage tenant shall not be ejected unless there is opportunity given to him to place his case before a county court judge? The position is extremely serious, because a man can be turned out at once instead of having a reasonable opportunity to retaining some kind of possession.

The Attorney-General

Then there are many other tenants who can also be turned out at once. One has to review the whole situation. Certainly, what the hon. Gentleman has said will be taken into account by my noble Friend.