000			01991cab a2200349 4500
001			ABS67440
008			040203n2003 000 0 eng u
035			_a(Sirsi) u124987
100			_aLoveland, I.
245			_aStamp duty and rules of evidence in possession proceedings
260			_c2003
490			_aThe Conveyancer _v(67) November/December 2003, 506-515(10)
520			_aExamines how the application of the Stamp Act 1891 s14(4) can lead to refusal to accept unstamped tenancy agreements as evidence in residential possession proceedings. Suggests that those seeking to rely thus on unstamped tenancy agreements should not conclude that their case in court is inevitably lost as there are several arguments available to mitigate the effects of s14 of the 1891 Act. Concludes that the purposes of s14 of the Act would be best served by the adoption of the principle arrived at in "In re Coolgardie, Goldfields Ltd" ([1900] 1CL 475) - the stamping of the agreement before the order is drawn up satisfies the statutory obligations - and its extension to include undertakings given by the litigants themselves. Although the abolition of stamp duty by the Finance Act 2003 will lessen the significance of s14 of the 1891 Act, s14 will continue to create difficulties.
590			_aABS
650			_aUNSTAMPED TENANCY AGREEMENTS
650			_aFENGL V FENGL
650			_aBIRCHALL V BULLOGH
650			_aMASON V MOTOR TRACTION CO LTD
650			_aIN RE COOLGARDIE GOLDFIELDS LTD
650			_aCIVIL PROCEDURE RULES PART 55
650			_aR V CITY OF LONDON COURT
650			_aADMISSIBILITY
650			_aSTAMP DUTY
650			_aRULES OF EVIDENCE
650			_aPOSSESSION PROCEEDINGS
650			_aPROTECTION FROM EVICTION ACT 1977 S5
650			_aHOUSING ACT 1988 S8
650			_aHOUSING ACT 1988 S21
650			_aSTAMP ACT 1891 S14(4)
690			_aPROPERTY-RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY-RESIDENTIAL LANDLORD AND TENANT-RESIDENTIAL TENANCIES
942			_n0
999			_c74097 _d74097