TMI Blog1937 (5) TMI 7X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppellants by summons in the Supreme Court of the Straits Settlements (Settlement of Singapore) asking for the issue of a writ of prohibition directed to the respondents to prohibit them from further proceedings in respect of a declaration made by the respondents on 11th December 1933, that a large block of 97 houses including the appellants' said house were insanitary within the meaning of Section 57 of the said Ordinance. The Singapore Improvement Ordinance, 1927, is divided into parts, Part 5, '(Sections 57 to 63 inclusive) deals with Insanitary Buildings and Part 6 (Sections 64 to 102) deals with Improvement Schemes. The following sections are very material: 57. Whenever it appears to the Board that within its administrative area any building which is used or is intended or is likely to be used as a dwelling place is of such a construction or is in such a condition as to be unfit for human habitation, the Board may by resolution declare such building to be insanitary. 3. By Section 58 (2) (as amended by the Amendment Act 13 of 1930) it is provided that when a declaration under Section 57 has been made the owner of a building in respect of which a declaration has be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed that the Board shall make such arrangements as it considers necessary for the re-housing of any persons thereby dishoused and shall pay such persons such compensation for disturbance and transport as in its absolute discretion it thinks reasonable. 4. It should be observed that there is no provision for compensation as regards the demolition. On llth December 1933, the respondents caused to be served upon the appellants notice of a resolution passed by the respondents on 22nd November 1933, under Section 57 of the Singapore Improvement Ordinance, 1927, whereby the respondents had declared the said house (among other houses) to be insanitary and by the said notice it was stated that any objection to-the said declaration should be delivered to the chairman of the respondents within one week from the service of the said' notice. The said house is a dwelling house and is one of a block of 94 such houses situate in an area bounded by Victoria Street, Bugis Street, Rochore Road and North Bridge Road within the jurisdiction of the respondents and as stated above is known as Municipal No. 543 North Bridge Road. The said resolution applied to all of the said 94 houses. It may be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... evidence. At the con. elusion of the arguments Mr. William Bartley, the chairman of the respondents, announced that consideration of the matter would be postponed until another day. Without giving any further notice of their intention in that behalf, by letter dated 5th June 1934 the respondents informed the appellants' solicitors that on 22nd May 1934, the declaration had been submitted by the respondents to the Governor in Council in accordance with the pro-visions of Section 59 of the Ordinance. On the following day notice was given by the appellants to the respondents that application would be made for a writ of prohibition against the respondents : and subsequently an originating summons was issued asking for a writ of prohibition prohibiting the respondents from proceeding further in respect of the declaration in question. The grounds mentioned in the summons which was issued pursuant to an order of the Court made on the originating summons, included (amongst others) the ground that the respondents had acted ultra vires in making the declaration. Affidavits were filed both by the appellants and the respondents. In particular Mr. William Bartley, the chairman of the respo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed with adequate sanitary conveniences and with a sink and suitable arrangements for disposing of slop water; and (4) in good general repair; and should have (5) a satisfactory water supply; (6) adequate washing accommodation; (7) adequate facilities for preparing and cooking food; and (8) a well-ventilated store for food. 10. Accordingly the Board as a whole inspected and examined on the 12th day of March 1934 the said premises and the construction and condition thereof. Upon such inspection the Board took with them the detailed evidence and objections given and raised by the objectors' expert witnesses on behalf of the objectors and gave due consideration to all matters pointed out on behalf of the objectors by such expert witnesses. Such inspection was of great importance and largely influenced the Board in its subsequent decisions upon the objections. Two members of the Board were absent when the Board made the inspection but they subsequently informed the Board that they had each made a visit individually. 13. In considering the standard of fitness for habitation the Board acted on the standard of fitness laid down in the Official Manual of Unfit Houses by the Minist ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tatement in writing of the grounds for the declaration and that no question of waiver of this objection arose. Further, he held that, since the respondents would have the duty of carrying out the declaration if it were approved by the Governor in Council, it was not too late to issue a writ of prohibition. He was, therefore, in favour of dismissing the appeal. In these circumstances the case comes before their Lordships. 8. Their Lordships think it right in the first place to state that they have no doubt that the respondents have throughout acted with complete good faith and with an earnest desire to improve the housing accommodation of the Town and Island of Singapore. Their powers, however, are strictly limited by the terms of the Ordinance. Within those powers they can determine questions gravely affecting the property and rights of the inhabitants, but if they step in any degree beyond the limits imposed, any person aggrieved is at liberty to invoke the assistance of the law. The Ordinance in many respects, and in particular in part 5, encroaches on the rights of the subject. If a building is demolished as the result of a declaration under Section 57 the owner can receive n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in Hall v. Manchester Corporation (1916) 113 LT 465 at p. 468, is a very strong one and vastly different from not upto modern or model requirements. 10. If the report of the Health Officer with its ten statements is regarded, as their Lordships think it must be regarded, as the main grounds upon which the respondents made their declaration, there is strong reason for thinking that the statements on the face of them appear to be directed to a complaint other than that of fitness for human habitation. The first five statements relate to construction, and it cannot be contended that applying the standards of housing of Singapore or for that matter, of England, they suggest anything more or worse than a small and perhaps a mean dwelling. In the first statement the words back to back are admitted to be inaccurate ; they are in fact corrected by the statement that there is an open area 141/2 feet by 10 feet at the rear of the house. Then come two statements as to light and as to ventilation. A house with rooms in it which are badly lighted or ill-ventilated cannot be held to be unfit for human habitation without condemning an enormous number of houses, including, if an illustrati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he view of the Ministry as to a desirable standard of fitness for houses in England and Wales, presumably in towns, and under conditions which are widely different from those of a great Eastern city. Apart however from this, the Manual itself is not dealing with the standard to be applied in considering whether houses can be held to be unfit for human habitation. It will be noted that there is not one of the matters referred to in the passages from the Manual referred to by Mr. Bartley -which is not capable of remedy, and on the other hand that there is not a single reference to those matters which generally render a house unfit for human habitation, such as a structure which is unsafe, a verminous condition of the materials, a pestiferous atmosphere, a state of things dangerous to health, or such a rotten or decayed condition of the building that rebuilding will be cheaper than extensive repair. Their Lordships are not attempting to define the facts or circumstances which render a building unfit for human habitation : they are merely giving reasons for thinking that the defects pointed out in the Manual- defects which in fact exist in country cottages all over the world, and in a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... approval by some other authority : see Rex v. Electricity Commissioners (1924) 1 KB 171 and cases there referred to. 14. On the other hand there must remain something to which prohibition can apply, some act which the respondents if not prohibited may do in excess of their jurisdiction, including any act, not merely ministerial, which may be done by them in carrying into effect any quasi-judicial order which they have wrongly made. Their Lordships do not doubt the correctness of the view expressed by R.S. Wright, J. in In re London Scottish Permanent Building Society (1894) 63 LJQ B 112, at p. 113, namely, that: An application for prohibition is never too late as long as there is something left for it to operate upon. 15. In the case of Rex v. North (1927) 1 KB 491, Scrutton, L.J., after expressly approving this dictum as that of a Judge who had great familiarity with this subject, remarked: When the sentence is unexecuted a statement of intention to execute it may be followed by a writ of prohibition, however, long a time may have elapsed since the original sentence was pronounced. 16. It is not immaterial in this connexion to observe, since the writ of prohibition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
