Early in 1939, the occupants of Hanbury Buildings, Limehouse, instigated the 'rent strikes' to draw attention to the high rents and lack of repairs. In November 1939, 26 tenants of Hanbury Buildings appeared as defendants at Bow County Court, where the landlord was seeking to have the tenants evicted for failure to pay rent. Below is a summary of the court cases that ensued at Bow County Court in November and December of that year.

The original articles are available from the British Newspaper Archives, located here.

East End News and London Shipping Chronicle,

The court was packed to hear twenty-six cases where the landlord was seeking possession and payment of rent. The summonses have been taken out by the landlord, Alexander Maclow for possession and the rent owing, whilst the defendants claimed that the rent was excessive and repairs had not been made.

The cases were heard separately. In the first case, that of Mr Blackburn of 2 Hanbury Buildings, a witness for the plaintiff gave evidence that stated if the place was in a bad state of repair it was due to the tennent. The defendant stated that the rent had increased from 4s. to 6s. 11d. in the twenty years he had lived there and that the place was in a bad state of repair. An architect who saw the premises said the place was in a poor state of repair on account of workmanship, and that he had not seen worse conditions than those at Hanbury Buildings. The judge decided for the defendant - with costs.

The second case taken was that of Mr Izatt, of 4, Hanbury Buildings. The plaintiff stated he had owned the property for seven years, and spent considerable sums of money in the process. Judge Powell decided for the defendant - with costs.

The next three cases of Izatt again, Oakley at no 10 Hanbury Buildings and Gillham at no 11 Hanbury Buildings the judge decided for the defendant - with costs.

In the last case, judgment was given to the plaintiff, with costs. Due to time constraints, nine other cases were adjourned for a later time.

East End News and London Shipping Chronicle,

The first case taken was that of Lovering of 14 Hanbury Buildings. The dispute was about unpaid rent, and after lengthy legal arguments the judge declared it a 'lock-out', with costs awarded to the defendant.

The next case was that of Mr Pennington, at 15 Hanbury Buildings which was dismissed.

The cases against Mr. Pennington, at 16 Hanbury Buildings, Mr Curle, at 17 Hanbury Buildings, Mr Lovering at 20 Hanbury Buildings and Mr Ashmore at 25 Hanbury Buildings were all dismissed with costs.

The case of Mr Lowe at 33 Hanbury Buildings rested on whether or not the place was controlled or de-controlled. The judge decided that the place was controlled and dismissed the action with costs.

The following cases were heard:

• The case against Mr Mix at 32 Hanbury Buildings was dismissed with costs.

• The case against Mr Izatt at 1 Hanbury Buildings was adjourned until the 14th.

• The case against Mr Dixon at 6 Hanbury Buildings was dismissed with costs

• The cases against Mr Roach at 7 Hanbury Buildings, Mr Toohey at 8 Hanbury Buildings, 9; Mr Stimpson at 13 Hanbury Buildings and Mr Hatton at 18 Hanbury Buildings were all dismissed with costs.

The case of Mr Mullins at 21 Hanbury Buildings was contested on the basis that it was de-controlled. Mullins admitted that the premises were empty when they were taken over. The judge agreed and gave judgement to the plaintiff but allowed the defendant to stay on the premises.

There were five more cases to be heard and they were all adjourned until the 14th December.

East End News and London Shipping Chronicle,

The hearing regarding the rent strike at Hanbury Buildings ended last week.

The first case was that of Mr. Lovering of 14 Hanbury Buildings. Possession was asked for on the grounds of unpaid rent, but the judge ruled in favour of the tennent - with costs.

The cases of Mr Sverton, of 28 Hanbury Buildings and Mr Dowling, of 29 Hanbury Buildings, were agreed in favour of the defendants, with costs.

The cases of Mr Docherty, of 31 and 34 Hanbury Buildings would be reviewed by their solicitors in order to arrive at a settlement.

The original articles are available from the British Newspaper Archives, located here.

Copyright © 2006 - R Wilkins