ENDING THE MORATORIUM

Hokitika Guardian, 19 July 1924, Page 1

ENDING THE MORATORIUM

(Lyttelton Times)

Tho provisions of the Alortgages Filial Extension Bill are very much what might have lipen expected after tho Prime Alinister’s explanation given seme time ago, of the principles upon which ho intended to draft the measure. The onus is thrown upon a mortgagor who desires lilt extension of his mortgage to .submit bis case to a Judge of the Supreme Court, who may take into consideration certain matters affecting the financial position of the mortgagor, the effect of an extension upon the security, the observance or otherwise by the mortgagor of conditions of mortgage, and the question of hardship which might bo inflicted by enforcement of the mortgage. The farmer is ensured tho right of appeal to a high legal authority .should his mortgagee prove unreasonable, and the provision of that right we think, should allay some of the anxiety with which a considerable section of the farming community awaits the lifting of tho ten-vear old moratorium.

In the great majority of eases, probr.ibly. it will he found that there is no need to invoke the machinery of the law. Whero both parties are intelligent and reasonable there should lie little necessity for litigation. Cases will be experienced, of course in which there is ail hftucsl dilferenco of opinion conccrnig a. mortgagor’s ultimate chance of recovery—tile tremendous optimism of some of the men on the land is a matter for warm admiration—and in which it is advisable that there should be an independent review of tho circumstances, and tlieso will go to the .Supreme Court. Tt is a matter for doubt whether the Supreme Court is the best tribunal to which the mutter could he referred. It is a high court', and tho cost of proceedings liefotc it is also high, a practical consideration for tho farmer who is fighting a battle against circumstances. Also, it is a very busy court, in which litigation sometimes is much delayed owing to an insufficient number of judges, so that this additional class of cases is calculated to add to inconveniences already experienced. Furthermore, the circumstances °f which the judge is permitted to take cognisance, as defined by the Bill, are, like all definitions, exclusive as well as inclusive. Tho judge may take into consideration the liuitlwiid condition of the mortgagee, but not whether be is a good farmer and trustworthy. In nine cases out of ten of the kind for which this Bill is intended to provide it is probable that tho interests of both mortgagee and mortgagor would best ho served by submission of all the facts to an arbirator. mutually agreed upon, and preferably known to both parties. The arbitrator, being unlimited by any order of reference, could ho depended upon to give a decision based on all the essential facts. There is, of course, no legal barrier against such a submission to arbitration under tho present Hill, if both parties are agreed upon such a course. But it would improve the Bill, in our opinion, if the option ‘were given to t'ho mortgagor to lefei his case to an arbitrator as an altei native to the Supreme Court.