I move that the Bill be now read a Second Time. This is a Bill to amend sub-section (1) of Section 46 of the Landlord and Tenant Act, 1931, in two respects. First, I shall deal with the amendment of paragraph (d) of the sub-section, probably the more important one. The effect of paragraph (d), as it has been interpreted by the courts, is that, if the original lessee had erected a building before he had actually obtained a building lease, the present-day lessee would not be entitled to the reversionary lease. This is being remedied by the amendment of paragraph (d), contained in paragraph (b) of sub-section (1) of Section 2 of the Bill. Certain necessary consequential provisions are contained in sub-section (2) of Section 2. That is the first amendment. There was a case recently where one of the judges said, in delivering judgment, that there was clearly a flaw in the Act, as he thought the intention was that a reversionary lease should be granted where the building was erected in accordance with an agreement; but it happened that the court decided that, as the Act stood, of the buildings were erected before the lease was signed, the lessee could not get the benefit of Section 46. We are bringing in this Bill to amend that.
We are also providing for another type of case, where the building lease was given outside an urban area or a village. There is a case where, about 60 years ago, a board of guardians got a building lease a little bit outside a village and, because it was not in what is described as an urban area, it was found that they did not get the benefits of a reversionary lease. The other amendment covers that by providing that any house, even though it may be outside an urban area, if the area of the land is not more than one acre, will get the benefit of Part V of the Landlord and Tenant Act, 1931.