HL Deb 25 March 1926 vol 63 cc824-6

Amendments reported (according to Order).

Clause 2:

Amendment of 15 Geo. 5. c. 20. s. 140. in its application to agricultural holdings.

2. Section one hundred and forty of the Law of Property Act, 1925 (which relates to the apportionment of conditions on severance), shall have effect as if at the end of subsection (2) thereof the following proviso were inserted:—

"Provided that where the land demised is an agricultural holding within the meaning of the Agricultural Holdings Act, 1923, the tenant on whom notice to quit is served by the person entitled to a severed part of the reversion may, if he is a tenant from year to year, at any time within twenty-eight days of the service of such notice to quit, serve on the persons severally entitled to the severed parts of the reversion a notice in writing to the effect that he accepts the notice to quit as a notice to quit the entire holding to take effect at the expiration of the then current year of tenancy; and the notice to quit shall have effect accordingly."

LORD STRACHIE moved to add to Clause 2 the words "in like manner as if it had been accepted under Section twenty-seven of the said Act." The noble Lord said: My Lords, upon the Committee stage of this Bill I raised a question with regard to a rather difficult point, and the Lord Chancellor was good enough to ask me to confer with him. I did so, and in consequence I have put down this Amendment. The object of the Amendment is to provide for a remedy where hardship occurs to a landlord in the case of selling part of a farm. Under the Bill as it stands, if an owner sells part of a farm, and the purchaser of that part gives notice to quit to the tenant of that part which has been purchased, the tenant of the unsold farm can give notice to the landlord and obtain compensation from the landlord. Obviously it is unfair that that should be the case. The landlord did not want to get rid of the tenant, and yet, because he has sold a few acres, the tenant would have a right to give him notice to quit the whole farm if the purchaser of the few acres has given the tenant notice to quit those few acres, and then the landlord may have to pay compensation, through no fault of his own.

Amendment moved— Clause 2, page 2, line 32, at end, insert ("in like manner as if it had been accepted under section twenty-seven of the said Act").—(Lord Strachie.)


My Lords, we are prepared to accept the Amendment. I think it deals with a point which I explained when the matter was discussed in Committee.

On Question, Amendment agreed to.


My Lords, I want to ask the noble and learned Viscount on the Woolsack a question as regards Clause 4, which deals with registration of certain charges, etc. I am anxious to ask whether, under the Law of Property Act, or the amending Bill, it will be necessary when minerals are reserved to register such reservation upon a sale of land.


This is not the place from which I usually pronounce opinions, but the answer, I believe, is in the negative.


On the last stage of the Bill Lord Phillimore, who is not here, remarked that the Act with which this Bill is connected, and other Acts, if they had done nothing else had added an enormous number of pages to the Statute Book. The noble and learned Viscount on the Woolsack replied that that number of pages was nothing to the number which had been thereby removed from the Statute Book. As a matter of fact the Statute Book remains as it was, but there is an edition of the Revised Statutes which leaves out all obsolete and repealed Statutes, and only represents the living law. That edition at present comes down to 1900, and I venture to suggest that this would be a good opportunity of carrying on the revised Statutes at least until 1920, which would have the effect of reducing twenty or twenty-one volumes to two volumes. I think that would be a great gain, and I venture to ask the Lord Chancellor if he will take the matter into his consideration and do whatever may be necessary to bring about that prolongation of the edition of the Revised Statutes.


My Lords, I am not quite sure whether there is any question before the House, but am quite willing to say that so far as I have any voice in the matter I shall be glad to bring about this improvement. It would be a great thing to have the Statute Book so much reduced that twenty volumes of Acts now nominally on the Statute Book, but most of which are not in force at all, shall be reduced to two or three volumes. Of course, the Treasury will have something to say to this, and they will be consulted, but I understand that the Revised Statutes find a ready sale, and it is probable that the cost of printing them will be more or less met by the prices realised.