Earl of Gosford, Landlord Blair, Tenant

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 22 February 1899
• Date: 22 February 1899
• Court: Court of Appeal (Ireland)

EARL OF GOSFORD,

LANDLORD

BLAIR,

TENANT

Appeal.

Landlord and tenant —- Fair rent — Occupation interest — "Circumstances of the case, holding, and district."

Curneen v. TottenhamIR [1896] 2 I. R. 37, 356.

Lanyon v. ClintonIR [1895] 2 I. R. 150.

Markey v. The Earl of GosfordDLTR 31 Ir. L. T. R. 37.

The Queen (Gosford) v. The Irish Land Commission Ante, p. 399.

The Queen (Gosford) v. The Irish Land CommissionIR [1899] 2 I. R. 399.

The Queen (Gosford) v. The Land Commission Ante, p. 420.

Vol- II.] QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION. 453 is seen at its best or worst (according to the point of view from Land Com. which it is regarded) amid the excitement of the crowded auction 1898. mart • but the price of land, as well as of any other property, may Tenant; (as (as it seems to us) be abnormally and unduly raised by a person 1\1"NAGIITEN Landlord. whom wealth or poverty or land hunger has made imprudent, but whose operations are not carried on at a public auction. I myself Meredith, J. regard the expressions, " public competition," " recklessly offered," which occur in the judgment of the Lord Justice, as intended to be illustrative, not exhaustive. Subject to this, it appears to me that the opinions expressed in the judgments to which I have referred do not conflict with or over-rule the views of the majority of the Land Commissioners as expressed in Harkey v. Gosford (1). The rents which have been fixed by us in this and the other cases in which I am about to deliver judgment have been fixed in accordance with the views I have indicated. Solicitors for the tenant : Peel 8j. Co. Solicitor for the landlord : Harris. J. MAC M. EARL OF GOSFORD, LANDLORD ; BLAIR, TENANT (2). Appeal. 1899. Landlord and tenant—Land Law (Ireland) Act, 1896, s. 1, sub-s. (1) (a) (g)—Fair rent—Occupation interest—" Circumstances of the case, holding, and district." The Irish Land Commission having at the request of the landlord stated a ease for the Court of Appeal, raising the question whether in fixing the fair rent of a holding the Court is bound to assume and to fix the fair rent upon the assumption (a) that the annual sum referred to in sub-sect. (1) (a) of sect. 1 of the Land Law (Ireland) Act, 1896, is the annual sum at which, after all the circumstances of the case, holding, and district, have been taken into consideraÂtion, the holding in the landlord's hands might reasonably be expected to let from year to year to a solvent and prudent tenant who desired to derive a benefit from the occupation of the tenement and not from its sale ; (6) that (1) 31 I. L. T. R. 97. (2) Before FITZ GIBBoN, WALK .R, and HoLMEs, L.JJ. Feb. 6, 7, 22. THE IRISH REPORTS. [189g. the fair rent of the holding referred to in sub-sect. (1) (g) of section 1 of the Land. Law (Ireland) Act, 1896, is the annual sum referred. to in sub-sect. (1) (a) of the same section less by a reasonable allowance in respect of the sum which would represent the present annual value of the improvements made by the tenant ; the Court of Appeal declined to answer the question on the grounds that it was not a question of law which was within their jurisdiction to deterÂmine ; that it was an abstract question, the answer to which would not necesÂsarily affect the determination of the fair rent of the holding before the Court, and could not be of general application to other cases : and. that the question was ambiguous and indefinite. APPEAL by way of case stated from the decision of the Irish Land Commission. The case stated was as follows : " 1. The area of the holding in this case is 25A. 3a. 10r., statute measure ; the Poor-law valuation is £27 16s. on land and £5 10s. on buildings ; total, £33 5s. " 2. The rent of the holding at the date of the passing of the Land Law (Ireland) Act, 1881, was £29 6s. 6d. By order of this Court dated the 12th day of May, 1883, the fair rent of the holdÂing was fixed at £22 10s. " 3. The tenant having served notice of an intention to fix a fair rent for a second statutory term, the ease was heard by a subÂcommission, who by order dated the 18th day of February, 1897, fixed the fair rent of the holding payable during the second statuÂtory term at £16 13s. lid. We refer to the said order and schedule of particulars of even date therewith. " 4. The landlord served notice requiring the case to be reheard before three Land Commissioners sitting together. " 5. The case was reheard before us at Armagh on the 5th day of May, 1898, when Mr. Charles Murphy, as counsel on behalf of the landlord, contended that in fixing the fair rent of the holding the Court was bound as matter of law to assume, and to fix the fair rent on the assumption, that the annual sum referred to in sub-sect. (1) (a) of section 1 of the Act of 1896, hereinafter called `the gross fair rent,' was the annual sum at which, after all the circumÂstances of the case, holding, and district, have been taken into conÂsideration, the holding in the landlord's hands might reasonably be expected to let from year to year to a solvent and prudent tenant who desired to derive a benefit from the occupation of the tenement VOL. II.] QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION. 455 and not from its sale, and that the fair rent of the holding referred Appeal. to in sub-sect. (1) (g) of the same section is the gross fair rent 1899' less by a reasonable allowance in respect of the sum which would GosFou I) Landlord ; represent the present annual value of the improvements made by the tenant. At the close of the case Mr. Murphy submitted to us Tenant. a requisition in point of law which was expressed in similar terms. " 6. We do not think it necessary to state the conflicting evidence which was given on behalf of the landlord and tenant respectively (and which was taken down by the official shorthand writer) as this case is conversant solely with a question of law of general application. "7. We reserved judgment in this case, and in eight other cases on the same estate in which the landlord's counsel put forward the same contention, and on the 6th day of June, 1898, we delivered judgment in Dublin. We declined to accede to the requisition of counsel for the landlord, being of opinion that the Land Law (Ireland) Acts contain no provision rendering it obligatory upon the Court (in fixing the fair rent of a holding) to make or act upon the assumption indicated in the requisition, and (in any event) being of opinion that the definition embodied in the requisition was ambiguous. We were of opinion that the fair rent of the holding should be fixed at £18, but at the request of counsel for the landÂlord we agreed to state this case for the consideration and decision of Her Majesty's Court of Appeal in Ireland. " The question for the consideration and decision of Her Majesty's Court of Appeal in Ireland is : "Whether, in fixing the fair rent of the holding, the Court is bound to assume and to fix the fair rent upon the assumption (a) that the annual sum referred to in sub-section (1) (a) of section 1 of the Land Law (Ireland) Act, 1896, is the annual sum at which, after all the circumstances of the case, holding, and district, have been taken into consideration, the holding in the landlord's hands might reasonably be expected to let from year to year to a solvent and prudent tenant who desired to derive a benefit from the occuÂpation of the tenement, and not from its sale ; (b), that the fair rent of the holding referred to in sub-section (1) (g) of section 1 of the Land Law (Ireland) Act, 1896, is the annual sum referred to 456 THE IRISH REPORTS. [1899. Appeal. in sub-sect. (1) of the same section less by a reasonable allowance 1899. in respect of the sum which would represent the present annual Gesromi, Landlord ; value of the improvements made by the tenant." &Ant, Tenant. " (Signed), JOSHUA E. PEEL. 26 July, 1998." Ronan, Q.C., and Campbell, Q.C. (with them C. Murphy), for the landlord :— The " fair rent" of a holding is to be ascertained by examiÂning the physical properties of the piece of ground therein comÂprised. In ascertaining this amount no difference is to be made by reason of the fact that the tenant is in occupation. No deduction is to be made from the gross fair rent in respect of " the occupation interest " : Markey v. The Earl of Gosford (1). No doubt the right of the...