§ [Nos. 2 and 3.]
§ Clause 8, page 5, line 25, after first "of", insert "an economically separable"
§
Clause 8, page 5, line 30, at end insert—
(2) For the purposes of subsection (1)(b) of this section a part of a holding shall be deemed to be an economically separable part if, and only if, the aggregate of the rents which, after the completion of the intended work, would be reasonably obtainable on separate lettings of that part and the remainder of the premises affected by or resulting from the work would not be substantially less than the rent which would then be reasonably obtainable on a letting of those premises as a whole.
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORMy Lords, with your Lordships' permission I will take Amendments 2 and 3 together. Sub-paragraph (b) of the new Clause 31A inserted in the 1954 Act by Clause 8 enables a tenant to succeed in a request for a new tenancy where the landlord seeks to resist the request because he wishes to reconstruct or redevelop the property but the tenant is unwilling to accept a new lease of a part only of his previous holding and his retention of that part will not interfere with the landlord's proposed works. The Amendment will restrict the tenant's liability to succeed in such cases: he will be able to obtain a new lease of part of his holding only where the rents obtainable for the landlord's property after it has been split in this way will not be substantially less than the rent obtainable if the property were let as one whole. Without this qualification a tenant's right to obtain a new lease of part of the premises could frustrate redevelopment and work injustice on landlords. For redevelopment may be uneconomic or useless unless the landlord is able to let the reconstructed premises as a whole. I beg to move that this House doth agree with the Commons in their Amendments No. 2 and 3.
§ Moved, That this House doth agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 2 and 3.
§ On Question, Motion agreed to.