I
>
13
-4-
501
in the way of the determination of a class of cases which ought to be heard speedily, especially as the Ordinance is only a temporary one,
but the consideration mentioned above seems to outweigh this
objection.
9.
Complainte were received that some landlords were refusing the standard rent and were then i suing distress warrants for amounts in excess of the standard rent, no doubt in the hope, ften well founded, that the tenant would have neither the means nor the know- ledge to resist auch an illegal distress by means of ordinary civil proceedings, that with their attendant expense and technicality. Section 5 is intended to check this practice, by giving the tenant a cheap and simple remedy before a magistrate. This section was not objected to by the landlords.
10.
Section 6 was inserted because of complaints that some landlords had gone to the extent of removing windows in wet weather, and of
their removing even staircases, in order to drive benants out, no doubt in order to get a premium from some incoming tenant. No objection was raised to this section either by the landlords.
11.
Sections 7, 8 and 9 were added on the recommendation of the
Standing Law Committee.
12. Section 7 provides that any bona fide)notice to quit given by a landlord on the ground that he intends to pull down or reconstruct
the property shall bind all sub-tenanta. The landlord has no
means of knowing who the sub-tenants are, and how many there are, and if he had to give notice under section 4(1) (f) of the principal Ordinance to all the tenants in actual occupation, he might find,
at the end of the three months, that he had failed to give notice
to some particular sub-tenant, whose existence, possibly, had been
deliberately concealed from him. It is desirable to facilitate
rather than to hamper building operatione generally.
13.
Page 510Page 511