Case No.:

AC-REV-21-1961

Court:

The High Court of Justice

Issue No.:

1962

Principles

·  Criminal Law—Rent premiums prohibited—Rent Restriction Ordinance, s. 15 Sudanese statute broader than its English counterpart Landlord and Tenant—Rent premiums prohibited—Rent Restriction Ordinance, s. 15 Sudanese statute broader than its English equivalent

The Sudanese statute prohibiting premiums paid by tenants to landlords is broader than its English counterpart in that (a) the Sudanese statute includes not only premiums but fines and any “like sum or the giving of any pecuniary consideration,” and (b) the Sudanese statute regulates sub-tenancies as well as tenancies.

Judgment

(CRIMINAL REVISION)

SUDAN GOVERNMENT v. ALBERT NAHMIAS

AC-REV-21-1961

Advocate: Ahmed Guma’a ... for the accused

B. Awadalla J. March 8, 1961: —By authority of the Chief Justice, I see no reason to intervene.

I entirely agree both with the trying magistrate and the judge of the High Court that this case is governed by Rent Restriction Ordinance, s.

The argument by the learned advocate for applicant that the amount paid by complainant was not paid to the “landlord” and as such is not “premium” within the meaning of Rent Restriction Ordinance, S. referred to is untenable. It is based on a misconception of the fact that the relevant section of the English Landlord and Tenant (Rent Control) Act, 1949, and our Rent Restriction Ordinance, s. i are entirely different in their wording. The English section says: “A person shall not as a condition of the grant, renewal or continuance of a tenancy to which this section applies require the payment of any premium in addition to the rent.” In R. v. Birmingham (West) Rent Tribunal, ex p. Edgbaston Investment Trust [1951] 2 K.B., cited by the learned advocate, Hilbery J. said that the word “premium” has a technical meaning and means only “a cash payment made to the lessor and representing or supposed to represent, the capital value of the difference between the actual rent and the best rent that might otherwise be obtained.” That is the reason why the relevant English section is very narrow in its operation compared with ours. We intentionally deviated from this wording so as to be able more thoroughly to cope with the mischief which our Ordinance was intended to prevent, and that is why we included the word “fine” before and the words “or other like sum or the giving of any pecuniary consideration in addition to the rent” after the word “premium.” Further more, the English section is restricted in its operation to the grant of tenancies; on the other hand our section is applicable to sub-tenancies as well as tenancies so that any money paid to a tenant who relinquished part of his term for a money consideration would be caught under it.