PUBLIC RESERVES LEASE.

Taihape Daily Times, Volume XI, Issue 3495, 25 May 1920, Page 5

PUBLIC RESERVES LEASE.

DISCUSSION AT BOROUGH COUNCIL. I A long discussion took place at the Borough Council meeting on Friday night in receipt of a legal opinion from Mr T, F. Martin, solicitor to the N.Z. Municipal Corporations, relative to Public Reserves Leases, and in particular with regard to Section 2, Block 4, held by Mr Geo. Bray. The point at issue was whether the Council had power to give valuation for improvements on the expiration of the lease, a promise to do so having been given by a previous Council and, an instance establishing a precedent having actually transpired. # Mr Martin, in his letter of April 26th, 1920, expresses the following opinion:—

“Your letters of the 23rd ulto. and ’‘’.4th inst. I regret the delay owing to my absence from Welington. 1. In my opinion the leasing powers of the Public Bodies Leases Act 1908, No. 240 (which I am now informed you have adopted) do not apply to lands held‘in trust under the Public Reserves Act, and the exercise of those powers of the former Act would, in terms of s. 3 thereof, be contrary to the provisitoins of the Public Re-

serves and Doxfiains Act 1911, which qrequires"the consent of the Goverilor- ; in-Coun_cil to the terms and conditions of leases of publfc'reserves_, and prescribes a maxingum i?erm of 42 years

(including renewal). If the Public %odies Leases Act were acted under you could, under s. 5 the":-e.o~f, lease for 50 years, or perpetually, and without the cpnsent of the Governor-in-Council, which in my opinion would be inconsistent with the said Act of 1911. That Act appears to be exhaustive

of the leasing pdwers of lands held

under the. Public Reserves Acts. See -in particular S. 3 of the 1911 Act. Al-

though s. 3 of the 1908 Act refers in general terms to future Acts, yet the fact that the 1911 ‘Act is 3. later Act,

and fine dealing‘ specifically with pub- , lic reserves cannot be wholly dis§earded_ The-land is held in trust for ‘:/lunicipal purposes, and is not an endowment':'9‘lTlie Certificate of Title - mentions this trust, "and that the land was acquired‘ by You ‘under the Public Reserves Act:-1881‘, and by s. 17 Public Reserves*'Actilß'Bl, and by s. 17 Public Reset-'v_es ‘and Domains Act 1908, and Glause 5 of Appendix No. 1 to the Land: Transfer Act 1915, «dealings with publicjreserves‘, otherwise than in conformity with the trusts thereof, may not.be registered. 2. But even if the said 1908 Act applied, s_'ll to which I am referred "would ‘pot in my opinion, allow the Council ' to give up to the outgoing Lessee the galué of improvements which under the existing Lease belongs to the Council. (Observe that the Section also empowers the Council to require the incoming Lessee to pay the value of improvements to itself). ‘As previously pointed out, the existing Lease expressly negatives the Lesseeis right to improvement which therefore fall in to the landlord at the end of the. term. The Lease was_ granted by the Governor under the now repealed s. 23 of the Public Reserves Act 1881, and for the full term of 14 years therein limited. and without any right of renewal. 3. In my opinion the suggestion that :1 surrender of the present

Lease (which expires in June next) -‘could he accepted, and a new Lease granted with a right of renewal, cannot be given effect to.. These steps, taken under s. 12 of the Act, would enable a. lease to be given otherwise than in accordance with the 1911 Act, and in any case the taking of these Steps just fbefore the expiry of the existing lease would, in my opinion, be, in the present circumstances, an imDroper and illegal exercise of the poWers of S. 12 (1) ((1). No advantage

would accrue to the Council or its «idisigrict from such a proceeding. A Council may not, in law, exercise a

power in accordance with its mere grammatical construction if the exerQise is deemed by the Court to be an abuse of such power. 4. Althlongfi improvements belong to the Landlord at the end of the term, even when the lease is silent on the subject, yet here we have the express and exceptional provision in the Lease that the Lessee shall have no right to the improve'ments. and in my opinion this provision cannot be disregarded. '5. I see no way of giving effect E 6 the Coun'cil’s desire, noW_expresse’d; to allow {the Lessee th‘e*‘v‘alue of the improvemeats‘, other, indeed, than by Way of special legislation.” ‘

M The Mayor mßved: “That the letter ffom Ml\Martin be received, and that éfcopy be sent to Messrs Bray and Somerville,- and the press. Mr Mar-

.‘bin’s previous letter‘ should also be made public to enable the bublic to ‘get the full significance of the posi-

Rica; 2

Ia Cr. Reid: Is there no other Way bufi ’-by special legislation?

The Mayor saifl it had been laid’ down clearly and forcibly' that there was ‘no fight at law. T}.lßvqfi'é.§fiOn lof Equity hadnot been discussed. A pre-

vious Council had promised certain things, which were illegal. Mr Bray when asked"-‘at whalt meeting this promisewas made, stated it was a t a ‘meeting at which the same ‘was done for others. The. Council confirmed the minutes without any minute referringto Mr Brayfs case. If Court proceedings were taken those minutes would have to beam-oduced. If ‘an injustice had been done they ‘should take proceedings to 1121‘-'r.= it righted_ On the other hand the Council had to consider the interests of the ratepayers. l Cr. Fookes said the special legislation could come up in the Washing-Up Bill, and he presumed would have to come from the Council, and not from individuals. ‘ '

:~ The Mayor said they would have to prove that the lessees had been hardJy, unfairly and unjustly deaft With.

Cr. Turnbull considered there was no doubt that an assurance of compensation for improvements had been given, and on this assurance Mr Bray had gone ahead and built. There was a moral obligation on the Council to see this carried out. Cr..'vCunninghame thought it rested» with the lessees to tahe the initiative, and the Council would support them. Or. Davies said the le§sees- should make a suggestion as to what should be don:

The Mayor’s motion was then put to the meeting and carried, Cr_ Reid voting against it. Later in the evening the matter was again brought up. 1 C'r. Davies said the impnovements ‘on the land should be valued and the lease put up to auction. The money for the improvements on the land, with which the new lease would «be loaded would be paid into the Council, and c-.o_u](l‘sfi“impounded until the matter was «settled. This jvouifi not interfere with the possible payment of all or any of the money w“Eich might be paid to the lessees and ,would not prejudice the tenantsfclaims. The time was short and something definite should be done. V "‘

‘A long discussion ensued, the Mayor eventually moving that the Town Clerk be instructed to take th‘e>necessary steps to put the lease "of section '2, bloék 4, Taihape, up to public aifction for 21 years at a rental to be fixed. Cr. Timbs secfinded.

Cr, Davies moved as an amendment that the C‘.ouncTJ go Into‘ the question of leasing the property as a whole‘ or in sub-division. and alsn_ as to the terms of the lease or leases to be granted and tcorne to a decision at a special meeting of the Council to be held on Friday, 28th inst. The amendment. on being put to the meeting 'v»fas- carried; ahe original motion being lost. . ' Cr. Reid said‘f_Qr the Co‘l‘lncil not to endeavour in some way to give compensation to the lessees under the circumstances would be most unjust, and that until the matter was fixed up the 3):-esent lessees should be allowed to remain: in possession. He moved: “That the Council take over the lease when its falls due, and re-let the property to the lessee or the present tenants at a rental or rental to lbe fixed, providing this can fl)e'legal]y done. ‘

"Seconded by Cr. Turnbull_ On being put to te vote, the motion was lost

The next business of the ‘evening was then proceeded wiffi.