“IDIOTIC PIECE OF LEGISLATION.”

Hokitika Guardian, 21 October 1927, Page 1

“IDIOTIC PIECE OF LEGISLATION.”

STRONG COMMENTS BY APPEAL COURT. AV.ELLI NGTOX. On, 19. Tho Court of Appeal to-day heard a, case in which, the State Advances Superintendent is appealing against the decision of Mr Justice Reed at Wanganui in favour of the Aotea District Maori Land Board. Tho State Advances Department was first and second mortgagee, and tho hoard was the lessor of lands granted to Elsie Alay Guile. The lessee made default, both: in payment of rent to the respondent board amounting to £1(19. anti in respect to the mortgages to the State Advances Superintendent, under which there was owing £865. AA hen, on June 30. this year, the respondent board re-entered the premises, the question arose as to who had priority against, the improvements to the property, which were valued at £I4OO for the satisfaction of their claims, the lessor or the mortgagee

Air Justice Reed held that any moneys received by the mortgagee ill respect to the value of improvements where the lessor had re-entered for non-payment of rent should lie applied first in payment to the lessor of all the rent anil other moneys owing by the outgoing tenant in respect of his tenancy, secondly in extinction, or reduction, as the case may he. of moneys owing in resoect i>! the mortgage,' and thirdly, that the balance, if any. should lie paid to the outgoing tenant.

Mr Fair, K.C.. appeared for the State Advances Department, and Air Izard, of Wanganui, for the Aland Land Board. Tho Court allowed the appeal without calling upon Afr Fair to reply. The judgment materially alters Air Justice Reed’s judgment- to the extent that the order of priority in the claim against any improvements to leasehold property is as lollows; (1) To tho mortgagee to the extent of his mortgage debt (2) lessee obtains the balance after flic payment of the mortgage debt. The lessor is left in Hie iunfurtunato fxisition of having to satisfy bis claim by light of action against the tenant. All the Judges caustically referred to what Afr Justice Sim termed an absolutely “idiotic piece of legislation.'' namely Section 97 of the Native Land Amendment Act, 1913, which brought about sueli an unjust, position. The Court was, however, unanimous in its opinion that the meaning and object of the Act gave (,belli no option but to give judgment for tbe Stale Advances Superintendent . No costs were allowed.