HL Deb 10 March 1942 vol 122 cc194-200

Order of the Day for the House to be put into Committee read.

Moved, That the House do now resolve itself into Committee.—(The Lord Chancellor).

On Question, Motion agreed to.

House in Committee accordingly:

[The EARL OF ONSLOW in the Chair.]

Clause 1 agreed to.

Clause 2:

Effect of notice of disclaimer.

(4) Where any holding within the meaning of the Agricultural Holdings Act, 1923, is disclaimed under this Act— (a) the tenancy shall, for the purpose? of Sections nine and ten of that Act, be deemed to terminate at the date on which the notice of disclaimer becomes effective in accordance with subsection (1) of this section;

EARL MANVERS, on behalf of Lord Phillimore, moved, in paragraph (a) of subsection (4), after "ten" to insert "and subsection (2) of Section sixteen". The noble Earl said: This Amendment, which I am moving on behalf of my noble friend, is little more than drafting. It is needed to prevent a legal difficulty arising in construing the Bill as passed in another place together with the Agricultural Holdings Act, 1923. Under Section 2 of the Act of 1923 claims to which subsection (1) of that section applies, cease to be enforceable after the expiration of two months from the termination of the tenancy unless certain particulars are given before the expiration of that period. Under this Bill as it stands, read with the Act of 1923, the time for the giving of such particulars would be related to a date from the material date when possession of requisitioned land was taken—that is, prior to the passing of the Bill, the date of such passing, and, in future cases, the date when the land was taken; whereas, having regard to the necessary sequence of events under the operation of the Bill it should be related to a date from the date on which the notice of disclaimer becomes effective, which in normal cases would be the expiration of one month from the service of the notice of disclaimer. Amendments for very similar objects and reasons were made in the House of Commons in what is now Clause 2 (4) of the Bill, and the present Amendment can conveniently be made at the same place.

Amendment moved— Page 3, line 39, after ("ten") insert ("and subsection (2) of Section sixteen").—(Earl Manvers.)

THE LORD CHANCELLOR (VISCOUNT SIMON)

I am obliged to my noble friend for moving this Amendment. It does meet a difficulty which might arise on the Bill as at present drawn, and I accept it as moved.

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 2, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 3:

Multiple leases.

3.—(1) Where possession of all the land comprised in a multiple lease to which this Act applies has been taken and is retained on behalf of His Majesty in the exercise of emergency powers, and all the separate tenements comprised in the lease are tenements (hereafter in this section referred to as "disclaim-able tenements") which the tenant holding under the multiple lease would, if he held them under separate leases, be entitled to disclaim under Section one of this Act, he may serve a notice of disclaimer under that section in respect of the lease, but, save as aforesaid, Section one of this Act shall not apply in the case of multiple leases, and the following provisions of this section shall have effect in lieu thereof.

(3) If, on any such application for permission to serve a notice of disclaimer in respect of the lease as a whole, the Court is satisfied, having regard to the extent to which possession has been taken and retained as aforesaid of the land comprised in the lease and the extent to which the tenements are disclaim-able tenements and all the circumstances of the case, that it is equitable to allow the tenant to disclaim the lease as a whole, it shall direct that the tenant shall be at liberty to serve, within such period as may be specified, a notice of disclaimer in respect of the lease as a whole.

THE LORD CHANCELLOR moved, in subsection (1), after "lease," where that word last occurs, to insert "and subsection (3) of that section shall apply to any such notice as if the reference to the conditions specified in subsection (1) of that section were a reference to the conditions specified in this subsection." The noble and learned Viscount said: This is little more than a drafting Amendment. The clause deals with a multiple lease, that is to say, a lease which, though a demise to a single tenant, is a demise of premises which either are being used in a series of separate occupations, or arc so adapted that they can be so used. The obvious example, of course, is the case of a block of flats. It is desirable to make quite plain, as this Amendment would do, that in a case of that sort where there has been a notice of disclaimer given by the tenant, that is to say, the tenant of the whole block of flats on the basis which the Bill provides in Clause 1, the landlord should have the same right to go to the County Court and challenge the basis on which the claim is made as he would have under the provisions of Clause 1. I have looked at the Amendment carefully, and I am satisfied that it is necessary to put it in for the purposes of clearness.

Amendment moved— Page 4, line 7, after ("lease") insert the said words.—(The Lord Chancellor.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE LORD CHANCELLOR moved, at the end of subsection (3), to insert: Provided that, if the Court gives such a direction in a case where possession of any tenement comprised in the lease has not been taken or is not retained as aforesaid, the Court may, if it thinks just, direct that the rent payable under the lease and, if the tenement is sub-let, the rent payable under the under-lease shall, notwithstanding the disclaimer, be payable, to such extent as may be directed, in respect of the period beginning with the material date and ending with the date on which the notice of disclaimer becomes effective, and the provisions of this Act relating to the apportionment of rent shall have effect subject to any such direction.

The noble and learned Viscount said: This Amendment is of rather more interest and importance, and perhaps I may be allowed in two or three words to explain the situation with which it deals. If you have a multiple lease and the requisitioning authority takes the whole block of flats, then of course the tenant goes out, and there is nothing more that need be provided beyond what is already in the Bill. But you may have a case where a requisitioning authority takes, not the whole block but perhaps one or two or three floors, and leaves something un-taken. In many eases the right course then would be to split the premises into two—the portion requisitioned and taken over, and the portion not taken over which remains under the previous tenancy. But you may have a case where so much of the premises has been taken as really to make it quite unfair to require the tenant, who is the tenant of all the premises, to remain under liabilities in respect of a little bit. In those circumstances it is important to provide, as the Bill now does provide, for a decision to be taken as to whether it would be right for him to be allowed to disclaim the whole premises or not. But if it is eventually decided that it is equitable to allow the tenant to disclaim the whole of the lease, there will be an interval of time between the moment when possession was taken by the Crown authorities of the greater part of the premises and the time when the tenant gets rid of the whole of his tenancy. It is necessary to provide under the procedure which is laid down in the Bill that in such circumstances a reasonable amount of rent should be fixed that he should be required to pay; otherwise he would be living for a certain time or using the small portion that has been left, with no liability to pay for it at all. That is the object of the Amendment. It is entirely consistent with the scheme of the Bill and I commend it with confidence to the Committee.

Amendment moved— Page 5, line 13, at end insert the said proviso.—(The Lord Chancellor.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 3, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 4 agreed to.

Clause 5:

Provisions in case where tenant is abroad.

5.—(1) Where possession of land comprised in a lease has been taken" on behalf of His Majesty in the exercise of emergency powers and the tenant was outside the United Kingdom for the whole or the greater part of the period of three months from the material date, and the Court is satisfied, on an application made by the tenant within a reasonable time after his return to the United Kingdom, that it was not reasonably practicable for him to exercise his rights under the provisions of this Act relating to disclaimer, or to give the neces-say authority for the exercise of those rights on his behalf, the Court may, if it thinks fit, extend the period for the exercise of those rights.

THE LORD CHANCELLOR moved, in subsection (1), after "application," to insert "made on behalf of the tenant or." The noble and learned Viscount said: If the Chairman agrees, the three Amendments on this clause can be taken together. The provision that is here sought to be made by this Amendment is to meet a case which has not been quite sufficiently provided for. As things are in Clause 5, two kinds of relief are given. The clause deals, it will be observed, with the case where the tenant is abroad at the time when he would otherwise be anxious to exercise his rights under the Bill. When premises are requisitioned, the Bill gives a power to the tenant, within three months, to serve a disclaimer of tenancy. If he is abroad he will not be in many cases able to do that. He may be serving with the Forces; he may be at the other end of the world. We have already provided for two kinds of case, but we have not provided for the third. We have provided for the case where the tenant is away during these three months in which he will be allowed to serve disclaimer and where he cannot authorize an agent to act for him during that period. The provision already in the Bill is to this effect, that when the tenant returns, though the three months are already up, he may make an application to have the time extended within which he may give notice of disclaimer. That kind of provision is to be found in many branches of our law. But there may be cases where the tenant will not be able to do that himself until the end of the war.

There is another case provided for where the tenant is absent from the country, but cannot be communicated with at all. We do not know where he is. None the less there may be somebody here who can satisfy the Court that he is in such relation to the tenant that the Court will treat him as what is called an "agent of necessity." His solicitor may be some person who is known to be, on ordinary occasions, acting for him. In that case it is possible for the Court to treat the "agent of necessity" as speaking for the tenant, and proceedings can take place without delay. A third case, which might not often arise, but which must be provided for and has not been provided for so far, is where the tenant is away and is able to communicate with his agent, but is not able to communicate with him in time before the end of the three months. The object of the Amendment is to secure that in such a case also it may be possible for the Court, in proper circumstances, to give relief. It is important for us to make this provision because in many cases tenants who are away doing dangerous public duty are people who certainly ought to be protected by the legislation which those of us at home are engaged in passing. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 6, line 26, after ("application"), insert ("made on behalf of the tenant or").—[The Lord Chancellor.]

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE LORD CHANCELLOR

I beg to move the next two Amendments.

Amendments moved— Page 6, line 30, after ("disclaimer"), insert ("within the said period"), line 31, after ("behalf"), insert ("within the said period").—[The Lord Chancellor.]

On Question, Amendments agreed to.

Clause 5, as amended, agreed to.

Clauses 6 and 7 agreed to.

Clause 8:

Notices and Certificates.

(4) A certificate purporting to be signed by or on behalf of the authority by whom possession of land comprised in a lease was taken on behalf of His Majesty in the exercise of emergency powers, and to specify the land of which, and the date on which, possession was so taken, shall be sufficient evidence for the purposes of this Act of the facts contained therein, unless the contrary is proved.

THE LORD CHANCELLOR moved, in subsection (4), after "taken," to insert "or was given up." The noble and learned Viscount said: This is the only other Amendment with which I have to trouble your Lordships. This is really only a provision with regard to evidence in Court. We have already made provision for evidence as to the date when possession was taken by the requisitioning Department. It would be intolerable to have to call people who are busy in another part of the country to come to Court to testify on a matter of that kind. But we omitted from the Bill the equally important provision that the certificate of the requisitioning Department will be evidence as to when the premises were yielded up—that is, at the other end of the requisitioning period. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 11, line 17 after ("taken") insert ("or was given up")—[The Lord Chancellor.]

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 8, as amended, agreed to.

Remaining clauses agreed to.

Forward to