KNOTTY POINT

Auckland Star, Volume LXXV, Issue 232, 30 September 1944, Page 8

KNOTTY POINT

"DWELLING" DEFINED

SUPREME COURT RULING

A point on which two magistrates had differed was involved in a judgment delivered yesterday afternoon by Mr. Justice Fair in deciding an appeal by a houseowner, who claimed possession of an apartment house from a tenant who was subletting. The executors in the estate of the late Clement James Blakey (Mr. H. P. Richmond) appealed against a magistrate's decision that a dwelling at 9, St. George's Bay Road rented by P.- C. Brennan (Mr. Milne) and sub-'let bv him in apartments was protected by the Fair Rents Act from the claim for possession. Argument turned on the definition of "dwelling house" within the meaning of the Fair Rents Act, which, respondent claimed, protected his sub-tenants. "It appears," said his Honor, "that both a consideration of the exact meaning of the relevant sections and of the general scope and effect of the Act establish that a building of this kind is not a 'dwelling house' within the meaning of the Act, and that the plaintiff is entitled to an order for possession." His Honor pointed out that it had been decided that the principal object of the Rent Restriction Acts in England was to protect a tenant who was residing in a house from being turned out of his home —not to protect a person who was not resident in a dwelling house, but who was making money by sub-letting it. It was held that personal occupation was the basis of the protection. In giving his decision, his Honor added that his conclusion was not in any way affected by the occupation of two rooms by the defendant's manageress. The form of the order to be made, the time within which possession is to be given, and the question of costs, he reserved to be determined later if the parties desired.