12 
The Agricultural Holdings Act, 1906. 
conveying the tenant’s produce to markets which have 
hitherto not been reasonably accessible, or from the building 
of new roads. Any increase in rent demanded from such 
causes must be rigorously excluded by the arbitrator from 
his consideration. In ordinary cases, perhaps, the task will 
not be one of great difficulty, but cases may occur where these 
causes and improvements, for which the tenant has neither 
directly, or indirectly, received an equivalent, are contributing 
to the demand for an increased rental. Such cases will require 
careful examination. 
The amount of compensation that is provided for disturbance 
is the loss or expense suffered or incurred by the tenant 
directly attributable to his quitting the holding, and it must 
be unavoidably incurred upon or in connection with the sale 
or removal of his household goods, or his implements of hus- 
bandry, pi’oduce, or farm stock on, or used in connection with, 
the holding. 
The words “unavoidably incurred,” would seem to put upon 
the tenant the duty of minimising any loss in this connection. 
He must not attempt to swell the damage by unnecessary 
expense, for unquestionably it is intended that the landlord 
should not be burdened with an exaggerated burden ; indeed, 
whilst on the one hand, he is unable to contract himself out of 
his liability, for the section provides that the compensation must 
be awarded “ notwithstanding any agreement to the contrary,” 
the tenant, on the other hand, must, as a condition precedent 
to a successful claim, have afforded the landlord a reasonable 
opportunity of making a valuation of his household goods, his 
implements of husbandry, produce, or farm stock on, or used in 
connection with, the holding, otherwise he will forfeit all right 
to compensation. In addition the tenant is required within two 
months after he has received notice to quit or there has been 
a refusal to grant a renewal of the tenancy, as the case may be, 
to give the landlord notice in writing of his intention to claim 
compensation. 
Assuming that the notice has been given by the tenant, 
and that he has afforded the landlord a reasonable opportunity 
of making the valuation described, it is still incumbent on 
him to make the claim for compensation within three months 
after the time he quits the holding, otherwise his right to claim 
will be barred. 
The right, moreover, of the tenant’s representatives to claim 
is barred where the tenant has died within three months before 
the date of the notice to quit, or in the case of a lease for years 
before the refusal to grant a renewal. It would seem that the 
“ tenant ” who is here meant is the original tenant, for the 
words employed are “ the tenant with whom a contract of 
