SUPREME COURT.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CXVI, Issue 14191, 13 October 1906, Page 3

SUPREME COURT.

CHRISTCHURCH. . Friday, October 12. (Before, his Honor Mr Justice Cooper.) INTERPRETATION OF WILLS. His Honor gave judgment following upon an originating summons for the interpretation of the wills of tho late William Atkinson, the late Charles Skevington, a.nd tho late James Patterson. CLAIM FOR POSSESSION. W. Widdmvson sued F. N. Adams, cycle and motor dealer, for possession of certain premises at the corner of' Manchester and St Asaph Streets, Christchurch, and. for £2OO for mesne profits. Mr Harper appeared for plaintiff, and Mr Stringer, with Air Johnston, for defendant. i Air Harper explained that the pro- 1 perty was leased to defendant on December 11, 1901, for five yearn, commencing April 20, 1901, and was sublet by him to one Mallouk, co-defen-dant. Tire statement of defence admitted that the property was lot to Adanrs, and was now in his possession by ,his sub-tenant, and that they refused to give up possession. It set out that in the deed of lease it was agreed that if defendant desired to take a renewal of the lease for a further five years, and gave notice of such desire before tho expiry of tho lease, paid the rents due, and had performed all the conditions of the lease, the defendant would grant a renewal of tire lease at the same rent, and with the same conditions except the renewal clause. Adams gave the necessary notice on April 11, and all things were done to entitle him to the renewal of the lease. The statement of tho defence of the counter-claim admitted that the defendant gave notice as required, but denied the fulfilment of the covenants of the lease, amongst others that tho premises should be kept in as good repair ; s when leased, subject to reasonable wear and tear. The question was whether the defendant was entitled to a renewal of the lease, and whether the covenants in the lease, which were precedent to the renewed lease, were carried out. Air Harper, indicated the direction the evidence would take, in proving the damage to the roof and to other parts of the building. The damages wore not of a trivial nature, amounting in the aggregate to over £2OO. But, however trivial the breaches of the covenant were, the authorities provided that he was not entitled to a renewal of the lease. His client was quite entitled to rely upon the fact that the rent had j not been paid within the (terms of the ! lease. . Air Stringer admitted non-payment of the rent within terms of the lease, and asked that this point should he argued at once, as if it was held vital, and his Honor was against him, the case would be determined. | William Widdowson, plaintiff, said the rent reserved by the lease was £175 per annum .and rates; and since the lease had expired he thought the premises were worth £3OO or £350 a year. Charles Clark, land and estate agent, Christchurch, said he considered the premises in question, occupied by Mallouk, would let fairly for £350. With some alterations a larger rental could he got. / | Air Harper referred his Honor to tho leading cases embodying the law upon the question of payment of rente under covenants of leases, and Air Stringer replied at length. : His Honor said he was prepared to give a judgment on this point at once, and Air Harper said he was prepared; to take judgment. _ | His Honor said that he considered the payment of the .rent under the conditions of the lease, .a month in advance, was precedent to the renewal of the lease, and defendant was, -in hie opinion, certainly bound to pay before the expiry of the lease. The tender of the rent after the time provided was clearly too late, and constituted a breach of the conditions. The election to take a renewal of the lease was abortive. The only question now was that of mesne profit. ’ Air Stringer called evidence on the point. F- N. Adams stated that he had occupied the premises from 1891 to 1904, when lie let them to Alallouk at the same rent. Witness considered that £175 was still the value' of the premises, otherwise lie would have wanted move for them. Ho did not think I rents had advanced, because he had to ' get out of the street as business was not good. The trams did not enhance the value, as they ran very close to j that side of the street.

Arthur Appleby, land and estate agent, Christchurch, said that a fair rental would vary according to the length of the lease. Manchester Street was better now than it had been for many years, and a fair rent for a term of five years would be £2lO a year.