I move amendment No. 1:—
In page 2, Section 3, to delete lines 35 to 40, and in page 3, to delete lines 1 to 3 and substitute a new section as follows:—
(1) Where a provisional order relating to any premises was quashed by order of certiorari made absolute before the passing of this Act and any arrears of rent are due in respect of the premises which would not be due if such provisional order were valid, the provisions of this section, shall have effect.
(2) Where judgment is given by the court for payment of any sum of money in respect of such arrears or for possession because of such arrears and the court is satisfied that it is reasonable to do so, the court may stay the execution of the judgment for such time and upon such conditions as the court thinks proper.
(3) Such conditions may include a condition that the said sum and costs shall be paid by the debtor by such instalments and at such times as the court may appoint and, from time to time, the court may vary the said conditions, whether or not circumstances have arisen whereby the stay of execution upon the judgment may have ceased, and impose a further stay upon the execution thereof.
(4) No order or warrant of execution shall issue on breach of any condition upon which execution of judgment has been stayed under this section except by order of the court made on notice to the tenant after such breach.
(5) In this section "judgment" includes order and decree.
We had a long discussion yesterday on Section 3. The purpose of the amendment is to preserve in the individual case in respect of which there was the court decision the contractual rights that were created by that court decision as between the parties and to provide at the same time, while preserving those rights, that it would be in the discretion of the court to ensure that in the enforcement of the rights the maximum and the widest possible latitude that any court can give will be given so as to ensure that the enforcement of the rights will not create hardship to the individual.
I do not think it is necessary to go over the arguments we put forward yesterday. The amendment, in my view, saves the principle and saves the individual. The Minister and I were at one in regard to Section 2 for the cases which had not been dealt with by the courts. I do not think there is much difference between the Minister and me on the individual. All we wanted to ensure was that the principle was not taken in this Bill that the Oireachtas could act as a court of appeal from a decision of the court.