Barrell v Fordree
|England & Wales
|.,Lord Warrington of Clyffe
|30 May 1932
|Judgment citation (vLex)
| UKHL J0530-1
|30 May 1932
|House of Lords
 UKHL J0530-1
Lord Warrington of Clyffe.
House of Lords
After hearing Counsel for the Appellant, as well on Friday the 22d, as on Monday the 25th, days of April last, upon the Petition and Appeal of Rosamund Ellen Barrell, Pauper, of No. 6, Ratcliffe Road, Forest Gate, in the County of Essex, praying, That the matter of the Order set forth in the Schedule thereto, namely, an Order of His Majesty's Court of Appeal, of the 27th of April 1931, might be reviewed before His Majesty the King, in His Court of Parliament, and that the said Order might be reversed, varied, or altered, or that the Petitioner might have such other relief in the premises as to His Majesty the King, in His Court of Parliament, might seem meet: as also upon the printed Case of George Fordree, lodged in answer to the said Appeal; and Counsel appearing for the Respondent, but not being called upon; and due consideration being had this day of what was offered for the said Appellant:
It is Ordered and Adjudged, by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in the Court of Parliament of His Majesty the King assembled, That the said Order of His Majesty's Court of Appeal, of the 27th day of April 1931, complained of in the said Appeal, be, and the same is hereby, Affirmed, and that the said Petition and Appeal be, and the same is hereby, dismissed this House.
This is an appeal from an Order dated the 27th April, 1931, of the Court of Appeal (Scrutton, Greer and Slesser, L.JJ.) affirming an Order dated the 3rd March, 1931, of the King's Bench Division, whereby an Order dated the 19th June, 1930, of the County Court Judge, in favour of the Appellant, was set aside and Judgment ordered to be entered for the Respondent.
The question to be determined is whether according to the true construction and effect of certain provisions of the Increase of Rent and Mortgage Interest (Restrictions) Act, 1920, and the Rent and Mortgage Interest Restrictions Act, 1923, respectively, and in the events which have happened, the landlord is entitled to judgment for the recovery of possession of certain rooms let furnished by the tenant in a dwelling house, which as a whole is one to which the Acts apply.
The predecessor in title of the Respondent let to the Appellant as a weekly tenant at a weekly rent of 14s. 4d. an unfurnished dwelling house known as No. 6, Ratcliffe Road, Forest Gate, in the County of Essex. This dwelling house was one to which the Acts in question apply.
On the 25th January, 1924, the reversion expectant on the said tenancy was assigned to the Respondent, and such tenancy was determined by a notice to quit expiring on the 5th May, 1930.
Prior to this date the Appellant had sub-let three rooms on the top floor partly furnished at a weekly rent of 22s., and two rooms on the ground floor fully furnished at a weekly rent of 20s. She retained in her own possession one room and a scullery on the ground floor. The sub-tenants at all material times were in exclusive possession of the rooms let to them respectively.
On the 9th May, 1930, the Respondent instituted proceedings in the County Court for recovery of possession of the whole of the premises or alternatively of the parts sub-let furnished. He subsequently withdrew his claim for possession of the entirety, and the only question is as to his right to recover possession of the parts sub-let furnished.
This question turns on the true construction and effect of certain provisions of the Acts of 1920 and 1923 which I will now state.
By Section 4 of the Act of 1923 it was provided that the following...
To continue readingRequest your trial
Cunningham v Kelly
... ... of the landlord that the Court should follow the reasoning which commended itself to the court of final appeal in England in the case of Barrell v. Fordree (2) .The Act of 1920 (10 and 11 Geo. 5, c. 17), by s. 12, sub-s. 2, excluded furnished lettings from the category of dwelling-houses to ... ...
- Bruno Phillipe Fehrenbach v Pegawai Penerima, Malaysia (selaku pelikuidasi Han Pacific Sdn Bhd)
- Ungku Sulaiman Abd Majid and Another v Director of Lands and Mines State of Johor and Another
- Yap Yew Cheong v Dirga Niaga (Selangor) Sdn Bhd
Interpretation Of Statutes
...first instance without reference to cases decided on any apparently similar English or other foreign statute. See also Barrel v. Fordree (1932) A.C. 676, per Lord Warrington of Cliffe at 682. See also Nafui Rabiu v. Kano State (1980) 8-11 S.C. 130 per Udoma, J.S.C. at 151. But in construing......