SPECIAL PROTECTION WITHDRAWN

Dominion, Volume 15, Issue 235, 30 June 1922, Page 6

SPECIAL PROTECTION WITHDRAWN

TENANTS GF SHOPS AND HOUSES . ) EX-SOLDIERS & CIVILIANS ON SAME FOOTING “Soldier tenants are now, in respect of all premises occupied by them, whether as dwellinghouses or shops, in the same position as any other tenants,” declared Air. Justice Salmond in a judgment entered in the Supreme Court yesterday on tho appeal by William' Robinson, a discharged soldier and tenant of a shop-dwelling, against an order of ejectment made by a Magistrate. “The question for determination was whether the special protection conferred upon discharged soldiers by section 13 of the War Legislation and Statute Law Amendment Act, 1918, had been continued by the amending legislation hi the Housing Amendment Act, 192122, or had, on the contrary, been taken away by that Act. After reviewing the Act and the amendments to it, His Honour said: “The Alagistrate has adopted the opinion that the effect of this new legislation is to abolish altogether the former distinction between soldiertenants and others, and to substitute a single uniform law for the ejectment of all tenants... Ho has held, ,that is to say, that section 13 of the Act of 1918 has been impliedly repealed by section 9 of the Act of 1921-22, I think that this is the correct solution of a somewhat puzzling question. I am of opinion that sub-section (1) of section *9 of the Housing Amendment Act, 1921-22, must be construed as meaning exactly what it says. It says that an order of ejectment may "be made against’a tenant on any one of six specified grounds, and on no other ground. It draws no distinction between one kind of tenant and another. This new and comprehensive provision cannot be cut down in its operation bv reference to the' previous legislation in favour of soldier-tenants. . .

“If there is any inconsistency, the old provisions must give way to the new, even to the extent of being wholly superseded by way of implied repeal . . . The earlier section must be treated as superseded. It has been contended that even though the special protection afforded soldier-tenants in respect of dwellinghouses no longer exists, they still retain it in respect of shops, notwithstanding the new Act. I cannot accept this contention. . . . In the obsence of sub-section 1 of section 13, as to dwellinghouses, sub-section 6. as to shops, would be inoperative. It simply means that the soldier shall have the. same protection for his shop as for his dwellinghouse, and if section 13 no longer confers dwellinghouse protection, it cannot be so in the case of a. shop. \ “I am of opinion, therefore,' that no part of section 13 of the War Legislation and Statute Law Amendment Act, 1918, has been continued in operation by section 9 of the Housing Amendment Act, 1921-22. Soldiertenants are now, in respect of al) premises occupied by them, whether as dwellinghouses or as shops, in the same position as any other tenants.” The appeal was dismissed with costs. R.S.A ANXIETY PRIME MINISTER TO BE QUESTIONED. At its meeting last night the executive of the Wellington R.S.A. decided to ask Air. G. Alitchell, AI.P., to ask the Prime Alinister the following question: “In view of Air. Justice Salmond’s decision that the protection, of returned soldier tenants has been abolished, and in view of the fact that no Indication was given to the House that this was the effect of last session’s legislation, and that such protection has been abolished in error, will legislation be prepared -Corthwith to continue this protection until at least the end of the present year?