Adams, Tenant; Dunseath, Landlord (No. 2)

CourtLand Commission (Ireland)
Judgment Date26 July 1898
Date26 July 1898

Land Com.

Before MEREDITH, J., and WRENCH and the Hon. GERALD FITZGERALD, Q.C., Commissioners.


Adams v. DunseathUNK 10 L. R. Ir. 109.

Mairs v. LeckyIR [1895] 2 I. R. at p. 480.

Markey v. GosfordDLTR 31 I. L. T. R. 97.

Ripley v. Mac Naghten Not yet reported.

Fair rent — Increased letting value — Allowance to the tenant in respect of improvement work — Balance of increased letting value — Right of the landlord thereto — Ulster custom.

VoL. II.] QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION. the first instance to the said Sheriff ; and it is further ordered that the said claimant, J. Battersby, do pay to the plaintiff herein the sum of £6, being that part of the said sum of £12 so applied in payÂment of costs, and that the said claimant do also pay to the said Sheriff the sum of £4 4s. as and for the costs of the said order of the 19th Aug., 1897, and do also pay to the said Sheriff the sum of £4 48., and 13s. 4d., for his attendance to measure expenses, and to the plaintiff the sum of £3 38. as and for their respective cost of this application." Solicitor for the sheriff : W. D. Sullivan. Solicitor for the plaintiff : H. Purcell. Solicitor for the claimant : J. T. Lowry. J. P. B. ADAMS, TENANT ; DUNSEA.TH, LANDLORD (No. 2) (1). Land Corn. 1898. Fair rent—Increased letting value—Allowance to the tenant in respect of imÂprovement work—Balance of increased letting value—Right of the landlord thereto—Ulster custom. (1) The tenant is entitled to a fair and liberal annual allowance in respect of the present capital value of his improvement work. (2) In ascertaining such capital value and allowance, regard must be had not merely to the expenditure of the tenant in moneys numbered or labour, but to the skill he has employed in developing the latent resources of the soil. (3) If, after a fair and liberal allowance has been made in respect of the tenant's improvement works, any surplus or balance of increased letting value remains, such surplus or balance is the property of the landlord, whether the holding is subject to the Ulster Custom or not. Ix this case the tenant had reclaimed 16 acres of land, and the Sub-Commission having estimated the cost of such reclamation, and the increased letting value resulting therefrom made a deducÂtion from the rent to be paid by the tenant at the rate of 5 per cent. upon the estimated cost of reclamation. This deduction did not absorb the entire increased letting value, but a balance or (1) Before MEREDITH, J., and WRENCH and the Hon. GERALD FITZGERA.LD, QC., Commissioners. 710 THE HUSH REPORTS. [1898. Land Com. surplus still remained over which the Sub-Commission divided 1898. equally between the landlord and the tenant. ADAMS, The question in the present appeal was whether the Sub Tenant ; DITSEATH, Commission were right in principle in so dividing the balance or Landlord. surplus of increased letting value equally between the landlord and tenant ; and if not, how that balance or surplus was to be dealt with. Serjeant Dodd (with him E. Greer), for the tenant :— We submit that no question in the present case can arise as to the balance of increased letting value, inasmuch as the deduction allowed by the Sub-Commission in respect of the tenant's improveÂment work is altogether inadequate. The increased letting value, which has been estimated at between 6 and 61 per cent., is no more than a fair return to the tenant for the work he has executed. Moreover, the Ulster Custom applies to the holding, and on an estate, where the Ulster Custom prevails, the landlord at any rate in early times never sought to exact anything from the tenant in respect of the labour or capital expended by him. Even assuming that a proper allowance has been made to a tenant for his improvement work, and that the Ulster Custom does not apply to the holding, a tenant according to the judgments in the former case of Adams v. Dunseath (1) has an interest over and above the allowance so made to him in respect of the improveÂments he has affected. That interest is more than sufficient to absorb any balance of increased letting value that may remain. Matheson, Q.C. (with him Caruth), for the landlord : The only question in this case is what allowance is to be made to the tenant in respect of his improvements in fixing a fair rent for the holding. The only allowance a tenant can get in respect of these improvements is a fair interest upon their original cost in so far as the original cost exists at the time of fixing the fair rent. In Adams v. Dunseath (1) the Judges all agreed that "improveÂments " in the Act of 1881, sect. 8, sub-sect. 9, meant the same thing as " improvements " in the Act of 1870, sect. 70, and that the (1) 10 L. R. Ir. 109. VOL. II.] QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION. 711 only improvements in respect of which a tenant could get an Land Coin. allowance in fixing a fair rent were the same improvements for 1898• which he would be entitled to claim compensation on quitting his ADIMS, enant holding. This establishes our contention that a tenant is only DUNSFATII, entitled to a fair percentage on the original cost of his improve- . Landlord ments. If the tenant is allowed anything more than this, he is given an interest which does not exist in law, something in the nature of an occupation interest which has recently been expressly repudiated. E. Greer, in...

To continue reading

Request your trial
1 cases
  • Adams, Tenant; Dunseathlandlord (No.2)
    • Ireland
    • Court of Appeal (Ireland)
    • 16 February 1899
    ...Land Law (Ireland) Act, 1896 (to which schedule we refer), the Sub-Commission (among other things) set forth that 16 acres of the (1) [1898] 2 I. R. 709. THE IRISH REPORTS. [1899. holding had been reclaimed by the tenant at a cost of £6 per acre, that the present capital value of the afores......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT