Seanad debates
Thursday, 9 July 2009
Land and Conveyancing Law Reform Bill 2008 [Seanad Bill amended by the Dáil]: Report and Final Stages.
Dermot Ahern (Louth, Fianna Fail)
There is nothing to prevent people who are currently entered into leases from entering into reviews with a view to reducing their rents. We are trying to send a signal, albeit in relation to future leases. I know the Labour Party has published a Bill. We looked at it and to be honest it was endeavouring to meddle in the area of freely entered into leases and agreements, heretofore made. Given that we are dealing with commercial property in this respect, it is inconceivable that these leases heretofore would have been entered into without legal advice. Apart from the legal difficulties of intervening in a freely entered into contract, by legislation, it is fraught with all types of difficulties. In the context of the upward-only rent reviews for the future, I wanted to, in effect, send a strong signal. This has not yet commenced. We accepted an amendment in the Dáil to include agreements for leases, recognising that these have the same effect as leases. Substantial representations were made to us and we recognise that.
I also recognise that this to a certain extent, may very well discommode some of the transactions that are in planning, but there is no agreement. Life in the commercial property sector is difficult enough as it is, so I indicated in the Dáil that I would commence this part of the legislation at a time when we believe it is appropriate to bring them on. I have done this with the Intoxicating Liquor Bill, in so far as I was willing to listen to representations made to me to the effect that it could be done better than by statute. If we find that from now on there is a reasonably level playing field and that new leases facilitate the ability to review rent downwards as well as upwards, then I would hesitate to bring this part of the legislation into operation. To a certain extent this is something that will be kept under review and we shall consult with the various interests involved.
As regards the case referred to by Senator Regan, from 2006, this is taken care of in Part 6, section 28(3) dealing with co-ownership. The court order provision is in section 29. We repealed section 2 of the Statute of Frauds in so far as this relates to contracts for sale or other dispositions of estates or interests in land. In effect, we have repealed the Statute of Frauds in so far as it relates to land or interests in land. Obviously we did not repeal it, in this legislation at least, as regards other types of property. However, I acknowledge what the Senator says. Given all these Acts we are now repealing, it will be a pleasure for law students for years to come that they do not have to wade through this multiplicity of legislation. Hopefully, law students of the future will remember us lovingly because we have made the whole area of land law somewhat easier to study.
No comments