LANDLORD NON-SUITED

Waikato Times, Volume 124, Issue 20832, 16 June 1939, Page 8

LANDLORD NON-SUITED

TWO NOTICEB TO QUIT SECOND REVIVES TENANCY FAIR RENTS ACT QUOTED The manner in which the serving of a second notice on the tenant of A house can, under the Fair Rents Act, 1936, revive a former tenancy was illustrated in the Magistrate's Court, Hamilton, before Mr S. L. Paterson, 5.M., to-day when E. S. Calvert (Mr J. C. Taylor) proceeded against J. B. Elvy (Mr G. Skelton, Auckland) for possession of a house owned by plaintiff in Lake Road, Frankton. Outlining the case, Mr Taylor said that notice to quit was first served on defendant in December last year, but the house was not vacated. No further notice was necessary under the Fair Rents Act, but as the tenants did not move another notice was served at the end of April, prior to the commencement of action.

“The second notice did not comply with the conditions of the Fair Rents Act,” said Mr Skelton. “The fact that a second notice was served waived the first notice and, by implication, revived the former tenancy, which would have to be cancelled by a month's notice before possession could he oh tained. The second notice was for 14 days only, and did not comply with the conditions laid down in Section 12 of the Act. The term of the new tenancy would have to he determined before arty order could he made by the court.”

"The second notice was not absolutely necessary, but was sent merely as a precaution,” said Mr Taylor, who contended that the first notice could still he relied upon. “I think plaintiff is out of court,” commented the magistrate in nonsu.ting plaintiff.