HOUSE’FOR EMPLOYEE

Waikato Times, Volume 126, Issue 21034, 9 February 1940, Page 6

HOUSE’FOR EMPLOYEE

POSITION OF EMPLOYER APPLICATION OF ACT The contention that where a house was allowed an employee as part of wages, this did not render the employer liable to the provisions of the Fair Rents Act, was put forward in a case in the Magistrate's Court. Hamilton, today in which R. T. Reid (Mr W. H. Adams), farmer, of Hamilton, sought possession of a dwelling occupied by Albert Curran. It was stated by Mr Adams that Curran had been employed by Reid, part of his remuneration including the house free of rent. On that ground the relation between Reid and Curran was that of master and servant, nqt landlord and tenant, and therefore the provisions of the Fair Rents Act did not apply. Curran had left his employment but refused to vacate the house. Verbal requests to quit were given, as counsel contended that no written notice was necessary. Curran said Reid had dismissed him, he had not left Reid. He would leave the house as soon as he could get another place. Mr Adams said the question of how Curran’s employment had been terminated did not affect the case. The magistrate. Mr S. L. Paterson. S.M.. reserved his decision.