TOO LOW? LEASES IN LAMBTON-QUAY

Evening Post, Volume LXXXVII, Issue 70, 24 March 1914, Page 8

TOO LOW? LEASES IN LAMBTON-QUAY

-CORPORATION SEEKS To UPSET jj THEM. «•' That the ground rentals of certain icorporation properties in the lower part f6'f Lambton-qnay were assessed too low, ;<Vas the basis of an action heard before -•his Honour the Chief Justice (Sir Robert •■Stout) at the Supreme Court to-day, ;yhen a motion was moved, on behalf 4gf the City Council, that the award fixing the leases in dispute made by William Moilat Hannay, Joseph Prime Max«well, and Alexander Macintosh (arbitrators), dated 31st October. 1915, be set '{{side, on the ground that ' ' William 'JMouat Hannay and Alexander Alacina tosh had misconducted themselves in "that they did not act judicially, and Iwere' biased in favour of the lessees." "/The motion further set out that the for the renewed term of four--fceeti years were "grossly under what a jfk'udent lessee would give for the 'ground." • « Mr. T- F. Martin, with Mr. J. ?O'Shea, City Solicitor, appeared in siip- f jjiort of the motion, nnd Mr. C. P. 'Skerrett, K.C., with Mr. E. K. Kirkcaldie, for the lessees. . - The sections and 'rentals involved in <tho motion were :-~Section 150 to Cus-;tomhou3e-qua.y ;( 40ft by 66ft lOin, £2 5s per foot: and section '156, 45ft by 66ft JlOin to Customhouse-quay and Brandonstreet. £3 15s per foot (Aitken, Wilson, »«nd Co.); sections 98, 85ft. frontage to H^ambton-quay by a depth of 7(tft, £3 10s •■pel' foot, and section 114, 30ft frontage to u <johnston-street« by a depth of 80ft 'fKirkcaldie and Stains) ; section 62a, 6ur frontage to Panama-fitreet by a -depth of 80ft, £3 per foot (Hall and -Knight) ; section 66c. 30ft frontage to 'Lambton-quay by average depth of 80ft; ;part of 65a, lift 9in frontage to Panamaetreefc and depth of 36ft 7in. £4 per „tfoot (George and Kerstey) ; section G4a, ''43ft 4in frontage to Lambton-quay by ■*a depth of 79ft *f routing Panama-street "md GGffc on other "boundary, average •;det>th 70ft, £5" per foot. ,; IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION. ",\ In opening in support of the motion, |Mr: Martin said that tho awards were adeemed' to be so low compared iv'ith the "feutals paid by other lessees for similar leases that the City Council had thought '*t was its duty to bring the matter before the Court, particularly a.< a consid"eftible number of valuations had yet, to be made. The Corporation quite understood that the function of the- Court was not merely to throw out the rentals, found 'by the arbitrators, and it was not? asking the Court to do this. It wished to demonstrate that the awards were so low as to .«how- that there were grounds for submitting that there had been bi,i6 on the part of the lessees' arbitrators. Altogether, awards were made in some eleven instances. His Honour : Did the three arbitrator agree? Mr. Martin replied In the negative. ■The lessees' arbitrators had agreed to the iow rentals and the Corporation's lessees to the high rentals. Counsel explained that no personal reflection whatever was made upon the honour and integrity of the arbitrators mentioned. The term "misconduct" was used only in a judicial sense. - His Htinour : It is a question of whether the arbitrators went against the weight of evidence. - Mr, Skerrett interjected that such an - argument could not be enough in an arbitrators' court. Mr. Martin said he proposed later to refer his Honour to similar cases in ' which rehearing had been granted. The evidence submitted on behalf of the Corporation (he contended) was the best that . could possibly have been supplied, as it showed what other lessees in the neighbourhood were paying for their leases. Further, he submitted that the suit.ability of the sites for general business purposes should be looked at, instead of just the fact that it was the intention of the lessees to sub-let. It^had previously been argued that some of the figures submitted by the Corjioration applied to "boom" times, but evidence had been ' produced to show that, as far as the Business part of the city was concerned, J there was a steady increase in values for the last twenty years, and the Corporation supported this by putting in figures from the Government Valuer. With the exception of only two instances, the lessees' arbitrators had endeavoured right through to show by , tabulated figures that the tenants could not afford to pay more than they were "paying. Another point was that there , was no mention in the awards of the 5 per cent, on freehold values, which under the Rating Apt was looked upon • as the minimum basis for rentals. ''Mr. Skerrett remarked that for Mr. Martin to prove his case it would be necessary tp establish frauds on the part . Of the valuers. His Honour said he took it that it must bo shown that tlie rentals in question were so low in comparison with „ rentals paid by. other tenants in the vicinity that bias would be proved. .Continuing. Mr. Martin paid that,'' in a general way, the evidence for the lessees was not based on actual dealings. He then cited numerous legal authorities 'to prove that his Honour had po\yer to upset the awards made. FIVE OUT OF ELEVEN. • Mr. O'Shea, who followed Mr. Martin, said that in five cases out of the eleven the arbitrators had agreed The arbitrators for sections 155, 156. 98. and 114 «cfe Messrs. Hannay, Macintosh, and Morison, section 62a Messrs. Hannay, Macintosh, and Maxwell, and section 64a Messrs. Biss, Macintosh, and Maxwell. Tn the six cases in which Mr. Macintosh was third arbitrator there had been disagreement, but in the live in which Mr. Gray was arbitrator with Messrs. Biss and Morison, the awards had been agreed to. In no instance with the exception of section 155 had the value of the land at tho time the awards were granted been taken into account Counsel then quoted the rentals of surrounding properties and reviewed at length the evidence submitted to the arbitrators, with the ..object of showing that the leases in dispute were not valued high enough. Mr. O'Shea, continuing his address, said that, instead of the awards in Lambton-quay being fixed at double those in Featherston street, they were -only fixed at half. "It makes you think, your Honour," remarked counsel, "that you are in Wonderland." . (Proceeding. )