Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

HOUSING LAW

LANDLORDS' EIGHTS SUITABILITY OF HOUSE INTERPRETATION OF ACT [bv TELEGRAPH —PRESS association] BLENHEIM; Thursday "In my opinion the Act does not require the landlord to show that there is available to the tenant another dwelling house in just as convenient a locality for the tenant as that in which he is residing," stated Mr. T. E. Maunsell, S.M., in his reserved decision in a case in which Eva May Nicholls, .spinster, of Blenheim, sought to recover possession of a house occupied by George Henry Eugene Hills, commercial traveller, of Blenheim.

"Were this so ; the landlord's position would be practically hopeless, especially in the large centres," the magistrate added. " The object of the Act is -to prevent people who do not own a home from being deprived of a home which Is substantially reasonable and suitable to their needs. Tenants must not be fastidious."

Tho facts disclosed were that the plaintiff purchased the house for her own use. Hills declined to vacate until a suitable similar house was found for him.

An offer was made by the plaintiff's brother of a house half a mile over the borough boundary, but after an inspection Hills raised objections regarding size, rent and security. These were largely met.

The dispute finally centred on the question of the location, which was not so handy to the town, the magistrate incidentally remarking: "These are no reasons why the plaintiff should not let the portion not required by herself." In his judgment Mr. Maunsell said there would be no real hardship on the defendant if an order was made for possession. Rather would there be hardship on the plaintiff if he refused an order, as she was living in small rooms and was dependant on the kindness of neighbours. An order was accordingly made.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19380401.2.127

Bibliographic details

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXV, Issue 23002, 1 April 1938, Page 11

Word Count
299

HOUSING LAW New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXV, Issue 23002, 1 April 1938, Page 11

HOUSING LAW New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXV, Issue 23002, 1 April 1938, Page 11

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert