— Agriculture.
250 Sect.
7.
Additional Rents, Penalties etc.
payable by way of penalty or liquidated damages (?•) the general rule in these last-mentioned cases being that when the tenant covenants not to do an act, such as ploughing pasture etc., and to pay an additional rent if he do it, the additional rent will be considered as liquidated damages (r) but that if, besides payment of the additional rent, the tenant's interest may be forfeited, the additional rent will be considered as a penalty (s), and only the damage actually suffered will be recoverable. Where the same sum is made payable on non-observance of two stipulations of varying degrees of importance, the sum will be treated as a penalty and not liquidated damages (t). Where a sum is proportionate to the extent of the non-observance of the stipulation, it is prima facie liquidated damages and not a penalty (u). Where the negative covenant is absolute and distinct from the stipulation to pay the additional rent or penalty, the tenant will be restrained by injunction from committing the act on payment of such rent or penalty (a). The right to additional rent reserved in case of breaking up meadow or permanent pasture is not waived by the landlord accepting the ordinary rent with knowledge of the acts of breaking up {h),
Penal rents not to give more than actual
damage.
527. In respect of an agricultural holding, however, notwithstanding any provision in a contract of tenancy making the tenant liable to pay a higher rent or other liquidated damages in the event of any breach or non-fulfilment of a covenant or condition, a landlord is not entitled to recover, by distress or otherwise, any sum in consequence of any breach or non-fulfilment of any such covenant or condition in excess of the damage actually suffered by him in consequence of the breach or non-fulfilment but this provision does not apply to any covenant or condition against breaking up permanent pasture, grubbing underwoods, or felling, cutting, lopping, or injuring trees, or regulating the burning of heather (c). In these excepted cases the law is as stated above.
Sect. 8. Tenant's right of free crop-
ping and disposal of
Fi^ee
Cropping and Disposal of Produce
(d).
528. Notwithstanding any custom of the country or the provisions any contract of tenancy or agreement respecting the method of cropping arable land (e) or the disposal of crops, a tenant of an of
produce.
RolfeY. (r) See Woodiuard v. Oyles { 690), 2 Yarn. 119 (ploughing pasture) Peterson (1772), 2 Bro. Pari. Cas. 436 (ploughing pasture) Bowers v. Nixon (1848), 12 Q. B. 546, 558 (ploughing pasturej Farrant v. Olmius (1820), 3 B. & Aid. 692 (ploughing pasture) Jones v. Green (1829), 3 Y. & J. 298 (sowing excess of WiUson v. Love, [1896] 1 Q. B. 626 (selling hay or straw). clover) and see Sloman v. Walter, 2 White (s) Barret v. Blagrave (1800), 5 Ves. 555 & Tudor, L. C. (7th ed.), p. 257. WiUson V. Love, supra. (t) (w) C/ydehank Engineering and, Shiphuilding Co. v. Yzquierdo, [1905] A. C. 6. (a) French v. Macale{M2), 2 Dr. & War. 269 (covenant not to burn land) Weston V. Metropolitan Asylum District (1882), 9 Q. B. D. 404. ih) Denton v. Richmond (1833), 1 C. & M. 734. (c) Agricultural Holdings Act, 1900 (63 & 64 Yict. c. 50), s. 6. (d) The law stated in this section does not come into operation until January 1, 1909. (e) Not including any land in grass which by the contract of tenancy is to be -retained in the same condition throughout the tenancy (Agricultural Holdings Act, 1906 (6 Edw. 7, c. 56), s. 3 (4)).
