CO129-535-8 Crown leases 17-6-1931 - 16-2-1932 — Page 8

3 G453

Lubunti

Submiti oben

the pombs.

weoparding the

Racer

in (2)

(2) Be

ZZ.

new Crown Lenses

the

8

28/8

granting

2

Care

sub.dorded Town & suburban lolo.

No. clears up many questions. It seems that

the plots are divided up, not by sub-lettings, but by

assignments, the assignees paying their full share of

the rent. In paragraph 4 it is stated that there is

no privity of contract between the assignees of the

sections and the assignee of the remaining portion.

Whether that is, in fact, the case depends upon the

terms of the assignments made by the original lessor.

The point is not of much importance, and I think we

can leave it that the Governor's statement is correct.

If it is correct, then it is true that the assignee

of the remaining portion would not be liable for the

rent payable by the other assignees, but the Governor

omits to add that the original lessor does remain

liable, although he has assigned all his interest.

I think paragraph 7 of the despatch shows that

there is a considerable advantage, from the point of

view of the Government, in having a separate contract

and

Love

with each tenant, which there disposes to a large

extent of the objection in paragraph 4 of ('(2).

As regards the equity of granting leases for the

original term to assignees whose interests are

determined by re-entry, according to the Digest of

Instructions regarding the disposal and tenure of land

forming the enclosure to (3) on 72867/30, the practice

is for the Crown to fix a moderate rent and take a

large premium when granting a lease (see under

Headings "Auction" and "Rent"). Presumably, the

lessee, on assigning a portion of his interest, would

apportion that moderate rent and likewise take a large

premium