MORTGAGE RELIEF

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXIV, Issue 22820, 30 August 1937, Page 12

MORTGAGE RELIEF

TASKS UNDER ACT FLOOD OF APPLICATIONS HEARINGS IN CAMERA VOLUNTARY SETTLEMENTS nY BARWSTEU The following is, I lie first of four articles written specially for the Herald on the effect of the decisions so far reported of tho Court of Review under The Mortgagors and Lessees Rehabilitation Act, 1030." Although 10 months have elapsed since tho passing into law of the Mortgagors and Lessees' Rehabilitation Act, it is only now that tho machinery established by tho Act for cleaning up the affairs of farmers and homeowners is coining into full operation.

How largo the task is can bo realised from tho fact that 3.'3,70.') applications were filed in the various Court offices in tho> Dominion by the closing date on January 31 last. While a considerable number of these have been settled by private arrangement between tho parties, and many morn arc in course of negotiation, tho majority will have to como before the commissions. Additional Commissions Nineteen additional commissions wore appointed last May. In Auckland City three commissions aro sitting every day, while in tho province thoro aro six commissions in more or less constant session. It has been arranged that commissions shall specialise in urban or rural applications, as tho caso may be, and tho three Auckland City commissions, for instance, aro as far as possible dealing only with city and suburban securities, wliilo farm mortgages as far as possible aro dealt with by an Auckland Rural Commission.

Not only does this practice minimise delay in inspections, but each commission naturally tends more rapidly to become expert in its own particular typo of application. Question of Uniformity

Each commission has ono lawyermember, and while it is as yet too early to comment on the degree of uniformity reached by tho decisions of commissions throughout tho country, tho presence of the Court of Review, presided over by Mr. Justice Johnson, as a tribunal of appeal, will act as a salutary check on differences in decisions. The most effectivo check on discrepancies between the decisions of various judicial tribunals in different parts of the country is generally exerted by tho publicity given by tho press and by legal publications to the judgments of different Courts. This publicity has, generally speaking, a doubly beneficial effect.

First, it acquaints the public with the decisions of tho Courts, and this enables tho man in the street to see how the law is being applied, and often enables him to seo what he should do himself. Thus a man reading in the press of a prosecution for failure to pay income tax will remind himself of the desirability of avoiding prosecution in his own caso. Necessarily Private

• Tho second benefit of publicity is that it enables tho public to protest if tho law is boing administered in such a way as to bo contrary to the great weight of current opinion. In tho case of tho Mortgagors' and Lessees' Rehabilitation Act, however, tho proceedings aro necessarily of a private nature, .since it naturally was not contemplated bv the let that all a man's private affairs could be examined in open Court with tho frankness that the Act requires. Consequently the public are excluded from the Belief Courts and from the commissions, and no press reports are allowed, neither even are lawyers entitled to be present unloss actually engaged in the caso under immediate consideration.

This procedure has the advantage of enabling an applicant 1 * affairs to be examined with thoroughness and it encourages absolute candour, but its disadvantages also are apparent. Disadvantages of Privacy

Not only is the public denied any voice in criticising the tone of decisions whose details it can never know, but the ordinary citizen is deprived of that little knowledge which would often enable him, by tho application of a little common sense, to see how to proceed in his own case to como to terms with his own mortgagor or mortgagee. 'Lawyers are unanimous that it is a great pity that it has been impossible so far to' devise some method to give more publicity to the general tone of the decisions as they are given. Tho New Zealand Law Journal has now found it possible to obtain and to publish, for tho benefit of the legal profession, an abstract (without names) of some 6(5 of the more important decisions of the Court of Review, in appeals brought from the various commissions.

The Hkjiam), in an endeavour to make these available for its readers, is publishing, in this and tho succeeding articles, some general notes on theso decisions. Settlements Encouraged In tho first place it should bo understood that it is not now possible to file an application for adjustment. The Act originally 'fixed the last day for filing applications as January 31, 1937, and late applications were allowed, by leave of the Court, up to February 28. It is now too lato to file a new application, and it is therefore to those who have already filed applications that theso notes arc addressed. With 33,000 applications filed it will bo realised that the Court and tho commissions naturally hope that those applicants who can arrive at voluntary settlements with their mortgagees will do so. Such arrangements are always approved by tho commissions if they are reasonable Tho Act appears to contemplate that voluntary settlements niust in all cases bo referred to tho commissions for approval, but it docs not expressly say so. The consequence is that in many cases voluntary agreements uro ijrnved at, and tho applications nro simply withdrawn ■by tho applicant. In such cases tho commissions do not get tho chance to oxamino tho terms of tho settlement. Duty of Applicants to Pay

With so large ft number of applications pending it is natural that many should have to wait a long time for hearing. Tho Act is silent as to tho duties of applicants waiting for hearing, but tlio Department of Justice spoke plainly on tbe point recently. A circular from tho department, to which publicity was widely given at tho end of April, states that mortgagors and lessees have a clear duty to pay, 'ponding tho hearing of their applications, whatever interest or rent appears to be reasonable. Somo applicants at that timo had been treating the Act as excusing them from all payments ponding tho hearing of their applications. This attitude is strongly criticised in tho department's circular, which .hints very strongly that in_such cases the Court of Review, if the landlord or mortgagee brings tho matter to its, notice, will dismiss the application altogether if a mortgagor or lessee withholds reasonable payments. .(To be eoatinued).