REVIEW
II
and also restricted recovery of possession; tenancy tribunals were set up, with specially simplified rules of procedure to assist applicants appearing in person.
Upon the restoration of the Civil Administration in May 1946 a Committee, under the chairmanship of Mr. Leo D'Almada, Q.C., was appointed to report on the practical workings of the Landlord and Tenant Proclamation and— of particular interest when considering post-war building in Hong Kong-the Committee's terms of reference also in- cluded 'whether, and if so how far and how, the rent of new premises should be controlled.'
The D'Almada Committee grasped this nettle firmly. Their report to Government said: 'The acute housing shortage prevailing in the Colony can only be remedied by large-scale new building. In view of the high cost of materials and wages, we are of the opinion that to place any restriction upon the rents of new premises would be to discourage such enterprises and inevitably to prolong the serious situation.' The Committee accordingly recommended that there should be no control of rents in the case of new premises and that premises continuously untenanted since the Liberation by reason of not being habitable and which are . . rendered tenantable by reason of extensive repairs at the landlord's expense should likewise not be the subject of rent control. 'It is felt,' said the Committee parenthetically, 'that only by such a freedom from rent control can landlords be induced to incur the heavy expendi- ture necessary to rehabilitate the large number of buildings which have been the victims of extensive looting or of war damage.'
+
The Landlord and Tenant Ordinance, which was enacted as a result of the Committee's recommendations, became law on 23rd May, 1947. As by the earlier Proclamation, tenants were protected against exploitation and eviction. Although some increase in the rents charged for pre-war premises was permitted, such rents still remained controlled. By shielding