The Practical Lawyer

Landlord and tenant – commercial

Right to inspect – intrusive

A typical lease will allow L, on giving reasonable notice, ‘to enter upon premises generally to inspect and examine the same to view the state of repair and condition thereof’.

Subscribers only...

Insolvency – L’s remedies (1)

This table summarises L’s remedies when dealing with an insolvent individual (non-corporate) T.
Subscribers only...

Inspection – drilling bore holes

A typical lease will allow L to inspect the premises (on giving reasonable notice). But, does that right to inspect mean that L has the right to drill bore holes?

Subscribers only...

Renewal lease – planning breaches

A recent case is of interest because it shows that serious planning breaches by T may be sufficient grounds for refusing to grant T a new lease (under LTA 1954).

In this particular case, T had ignored a planning Enforcement Notice (and had been convicted in the magistrate’s court); he had also had a Breach of Condition notice served on him. As a result, the vast majority of the activities carried out by T on the premises had been unauthorised, and therefore illegal. In the court’s view, T’s ‘appalling past record of breaches of planning control’ and ‘unreliability as a witness’ meant it was unlikely that ‘if he was granted a renewal of his tenancy, he would continue to act lawfully’. Accordingly, L’s opposition to the new tenancy was upheld, with T’s planning breaches coming within the scope of ‘any other reason connected with T’s use or management of the holding’ (under s30(1)(c) LTA 1954). It is not clear from the report whether T’s use of the premises was in breach of the user clause in the lease; if it was, then one would assume that L would be taken to have waived those breaches by continuing to accept rent. But, subject to that point, the case does illustrate that planning breaches can be relevant on a 1954 Act renewal. ?Fowles v Heathrow Airport [2008] EWCA Civ 1270. Source: TLT Solicitors.


Rent – limitation periods

What are the limitation periods for claiming rent from a defaulting T? In practice, Ls are unlikely to allow rent to be unpaid for a long period of time, and a more relevant issue will be the length of the limitation period for enforcing any judgment obtained against that defaulting T.

Subscribers only...

Remedies – Third party

If T defaults, then L will consider what remedies there are against third parties, such as former Ts and guarantors. Particular points to bear in mind are:

Subscribers only...

Contracting out – ‘term of years certain’

Be aware of a major trap for L’s when drafting leases. The CA recently held that contracting out of LTA 1954 was not possible if a lease defines the term as a fixed period, together with ‘any period of holding over or extension, whether by statute or common law or by agreement’.

Subscribers only...

Corporate L – individual T

A new PD imposes a code of conduct for debt claims by corporate claimants against individual defendants. It will therefore apply to corporate Ls who are trying to recover debts from individual Ts or guarantors.

Subscribers only...

SDLT – holding over (3)

The rules on charging SDLT when T is holding over are complex, and depend upon whether the original lease was granted under the SDLT regime, or the earlier Stamp Duty regime.

Subscribers only...

SDLT – holding over (2)

Different SDLT rules apply when holding over a lease granted under the Stamp Duty regime (as opposed to one granted under the SDLT regime – see previous entry).

Suppose T was granted a lease in 1998 (on which Stamp Duty was paid), with the contractual term expiring in October 2008.

Subscribers only...

Page 50 of 52

Most-read articles

Constructive trusts – property
Wednesday, 12 September 2018
The author gives a helpful analysis of a ruling following a claim to establish a constructive trust or proprietary estoppel in respect of a domestic property. The deceased died intestate while living... Read more...
Professional negligence – adjudication
Wednesday, 12 September 2018
The Professional Negligence Adjudication Scheme is run by the Professional Negligence Bar Association. It offers a voluntary ADR procedure, modelled on the adjudication system in construction... Read more...
Waste – L’s liability
Wednesday, 12 September 2018
Ls should be aware of the environmental enforcement obligations that may be incurred as a result of T’s activities. Read more...
Part 36 – late acceptance
Wednesday, 12 September 2018
If a Part 36 offer is accepted out of time (ie outside the 21 day period) in a low value protocol case, then what are the costs consequences? In particular, does late acceptance mean a liability to... Read more...
HMOs – new rules
Wednesday, 12 September 2018
The definition of house in multiple occupation (HMO) changes on 1 October 2018. The new definition covers properties occupied by five or more people, comprising two or more separate households. Read more...
Energy efficiency – reassessment by T?
Wednesday, 12 September 2018
The Energy Efficiency (MEES) Regs mean it is no longer possible to grant new leases to properties with an EPC of F or G. Moreover, existing lettings of F and G properties will become unlawful from... Read more...
Knotweed – nuisance
Wednesday, 12 September 2018
Last year, we had county court claims in Cardiff and Truro in which it was held that the encroachment of Japanese knotweed would be actionable as a ‘private nuisance’. The Cardiff cases have now... Read more...
Procedure – expert witnesses
Wednesday, 12 September 2018
Expert witnesses must comply with court rules and related guidance appropriate to their area of expertise. New guidance for paediatric expert witnesses in family proceedings has now been issued. Read more...
Self-employed – or worker?
Wednesday, 12 September 2018
The Pimlico Plumbers case was seen as a victory for workers in the gig economy, with the Supreme Court looking at the reality of the relationship (rather than the legal labels attached). So, what... Read more...
Offences – mens rea
Wednesday, 12 September 2018
This was a pre-trial appeal of a ruling at a preparatory hearing. The two appellants (A) faced charges under s17 Terrorism Act 2000 of sending money overseas, or arranging to do so, knowing or having... Read more...


IAG International
In House Lawyer
Join the IBA now!
MSI Global Alliance