Clause 2. — (Suspension of Execution of Order for Possession.)

Part of Orders of the Day — Protection from Eviction Bill – in the House of Commons at 12:00 am on 8th December 1964.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Mr David Weitzman Mr David Weitzman , Stoke Newington and Hackney North 12:00 am, 8th December 1964

I hope the House will reject the Amendment. The grounds set out in subsection (4) are simple and concise and cover all sorts of circumstances which should weigh with the court in regard to this matter. The hon. Member for Crosby (Mr. Graham Page) is surely forgetting that, first of all, in subsection (4) there are the words … shall have regard to all the circumstances.… so that the judge must have regard to a matter of this kind. Again, in subsection (4,b) there are the words whether he has unreasonably refused an offer of a tenancy of the premises or part of the premises … and then, in addition, subsection (4,c) says: whether he has failed to make reasonable efforts to obtain other suitable accommodation. The Amendment is, therefore, quite unnecessary. One can imagine a judge having in front of him evidence that the tenant has refused a proper offer of suitable accommodation and coming to the conclusion that the tenant has failed to make reasonable efforts to obtain other suitable accommodation. If the Amendment were accepted, all it would do would be to encumber subsection (4). It is quite unnecessary.