Unit 5: Grant of lease and underlease Flashcards
Freehold vs Leasehold - general
- A freehold lasts forever, whilst a lease is a depreciating asset from date it is granted
- Leasehold property is popular and desirable, particularly in the commercial context
Lease advantages for landlord?
- Positive covenants cannot be easily enforced against subsequent owners in freehold land.
o When buildings have multiple occupants, whether commercial, residential or a mixture of both, it is important that positive covenants, particularly in relation to repair, can be enforced and this is difficult to achieve with freehold land. Leases are therefore necessary to enforce covenants in buildings with multiple occupants. - Landlord retains a capital interest in the freehold which, depending on the market, will be an asset
o If the lease is drafted properly, the landlord will be able to recover all expenditure, for example in relation to repairs and maintenance, by way of a service charge paid by the tenant.
o The landlord also gains a steady income by renting the property at a market rent.
Lease advantages for commercial tenant?
- A lease is flexible: if it is a short-term lease, the tenant can move easily at the end of the term if they need smaller or larger premises.
- Tenants can often negotiate a break clause to enable them to terminate the lease before the end of the fixed term.
- Tenant has no capital outlay
- Although they may need to pay a capital sum (premium) at the start of the lease, the capital of their business is not tied up in the premises
Prescribed clause
Leases dated on or after 19 Jun 2006 out of registered land + compulsorily registrable must contain this at beginning of lease or immediately after any front cover sheet
Details of lease + all info LR need to complete registration
Commencement
o The lease starts with the words ‘the lease’, followed by the date of its grant and the names and addresses of the parties
o Where created out of a registered title, the document will carry the usual Land Registry heading (county and district, landlord’s title number, brief description of the property, and date) at the top of its first page
Grant of lease
o This is the operative part, whereby the landlord grants the tenant a lease of the property for the term
o The term can be fixed, periodic, or at will
Fixed term lease
o most commercial properties are leased like this
o can be weeks, months or years (usually years)
o longer leases might have a ‘break clause,’ e.g., an office lease of 15 years with a tenant’s right to terminate on the 10th anniversary of the start of the term
o at the end of the fixed term, lease ‘expires’ automatically, without the landlord or tenant having to serve a notice
o Suitable for - tenants who know exactly how long they wish to occupy property and do not object to being locked in for that period of time
Periodic tenancy
- continues indefinitely from one period to another
- Suitable for - tenants who are not certain as to how long they wish to occupy the property
- lease will run until either party decides to terminate it by giving the other party notice that they want to bring the arrangements to an end
- notice period should be the length of one period of the lease, unless it is yearly (in which case, six month’s notice)
- Tenancy at will
o where the tenant occupies the property with the permission of the landlord on the terms that the tenancy may be terminated by either party at any time
o is indefinite and might last any number of days, weeks or years
o often not used for commercial properties - too uncertain
o can occur where the parties are not expecting them, e.g., where the tenant remains in occupation at the end of the formal lease, or where parties want to create an informal agreement, such as a tenancy between family members
Absolute covenant?
tenant absolutely cannot do stated action according to lease
landlord may allow it, either: one-off consent or permanent variation of the lease
landlord has total discretion on the matter
- Qualified Covenant
allows the tenant to carry out the stated action, but only if it obtains the landlord’s consent first
- Fully Qualified Covenant
allows tenant to carry out the stated action if it obtains landlord’s consent first, BUT
the landlord will not be able to withhold consent unreasonably
* Practice note - tenants’ solicitors will try to insert the words ‘reasonable’ and ‘reasonably’ throughout the document when negotiating the lease
Purpose of full repairing and insuring leases?
protect landlords from incurring any expenditure that cannot be recovered from tenants
Obligations for tenant who has lease of part of building?
responsibility will usually be divided between landlord and tenant:
o tenant - usually responsible for non-structural parts of the premises
o landlord - usually responsible for the structural parts of the building and the common areas
What is a covenant to repair?
o There must be disrepair first, before the tenant can be in breach of covenant to repair. The physical condition of the property must have deteriorated from some previous physical condition.
o Property need not be kept in perfect repair: ‘It need only be put into such a state of repair as renders it fit for the occupation of a reasonably minded tenant of the class likely to take it’.
Definition of repair?
o Works of renewal or improvement go beyond repair. Repair is restoration by renewal or replacement of parts of a whole, not renewal or replacement of the whole (Lurcott v Wakeley [1911]). It is a question of fact and degree and the work that the tenant has to carry out depends on the age and nature of the property at the date of the lease.
Obligation on tenant for repair?
o A repairing covenant does not oblige the tenant to give back to the landlord a property that is ‘wholly different’ from that leased to them, but it can oblige the tenant to remedy an inherent defect in the design and/or construction of the building if that is the only way to effect the repair
Covenant to ‘keep’ a building in repair?
also means to ‘put’ it into repair, even if that involves the tenant putting the building into a BETTER state of repair than when they entered the lease
Covenant to ‘keep the property in good condition’?
MORE ONEROUS than a plain covenant to keep it in repair: can mean that the tenant is obliged to carry out some works, even though there is no actual disrepair (Welsh v Greenwich LBC)
Letting of a whole vs multi-occupation insurance
o Letting of a whole - tenant could be made solely responsible for insurance
o Buildings in multi-occupation - landlord takes out the insurance, with the cost being passed on to the tenant as a separate insurance rent
Landlord’s covenant to insure the property against defined risks?
- There is often an inclusive list of the risks which the landlord must insure against, for example ‘fire, storm, flood, etc’.
o The problem with this is that the landlord may continue to insure against unlikely or expensive risks and if new risks arise, these may not be covered.
o Accordingly, it is common for the list of risks to conclude with ‘such other risks as the landlord may reasonably require’. - Landlord’s obligation to insure should be limited so that it does not include exclusions, limitations, excesses and conditions imposed by insurer and any risks that are not commonly available
o In practice - liability for any shortfall in the proceeds caused by these are passed on to the tenant in the repairing covenant - Property should be insured to its ‘full reinstatement value,’ otherwise if the property is totally destroyed there will not be enough money to pay for its rebuilding
o Full reinstatement value INCLUDES costs of demolition and site clearance, professional fees (e.g., architects, surveyors, etc) and an allowance for children - E
A covenant by the tenant to pay for the insurance policy?
- Usually this covenant is to pay a sum reserved as rent
o includes:
premium for the buildings insurance policy and
an associated policy covering the landlord for loss of the annual rent (i.e. income stream) during any period where the tenant is unable to use the building following the occurrence of an insurance risk
A covenant by the landlord to reinstate the property?
- Often expressed as a covenant to use the insurance proceeds to reinstate the property
o Practice note - tenant would ideally like this extended to include an obligation for the landlord to make good any shortfall in the insurance proceeds from its own resources as there will have been a failure to insure the property to its full reinstatement value
Provision for when reinstatement is impossible?
o Usually - lease will provide for insurance monies to be retained by the landlord, whose building it is, but
o a tenant in a strong negotiating position may have agreed that:
the proceeds will be passed over to the tenant who has been paying the premiums, or
that the proceeds will be shared between landlord and tenant proportionate to their respective interests in the building.
Rent suspension?
- General rule - in the absence of an express term to the contrary, rent will continue to be payable even if the property is rendered unusable.
o Tenant - should ensure that the lease provides for the payment of rent to be suspended during any period that the property cannot be occupied following damage by an insured risk
o In practice ^ insurance is limited in duration (often 3 y) and the landlord may attempt to limit the rent suspension accordingly
Termination - general rule
- General rule - unless the lease states otherwise, if the building is totally destroyed, the doctrine of frustration will only apply in exceptional circumstances
- Implications:
o the lease will often give the landlord the right to terminate the lease should reinstatement prove impossible
o tenant should try to ensure that they have the same right (particularly where rent suspension is time-limited)
o tenant should be able to terminate the lease if the property has not been reinstated by the end of the rent suspension period; otherwise they will be paying rent for a property they cannot use, as well as the rent on alternative premises
Issues when the damage is caused by something not covered by the insurance policy?
o e.g., where a particular risk was not insurable or
o e.g., parties agreed that the landlord should not insure against it because the premiums were to high
o e.g., where the risk was insured but the tenant has done something entitling the insurer to withhold all or part of the payout
o CONSEQUENCE - tenant will be liable to repair the property under the repairing covenant
When to use an absolute covenant for alterations?
- More common to use absolute covenants in relation to structural and exterior alteration
- A tenant of business premises can use s3 Landlord and Tenant Act 1927 to enable it to carry out ‘improvements’ even where the lease contains an absolute prohibition
Procedure for s3 ‘improvements’?
tenant can serve a notice on landlord detailing its proposals
landlord has 3 months within which to object
if it objects, the tenant has the right to apply to the court authorisation to carry out the improvements
court can authorise the improvements if:
they add to the letting value of the property,
are reasonable and suitable to the character
do not diminish the value of any other property of the landlord
Alternative to s3 improvement procedure
- Instead of objecting or ^, the landlord can offer to carry out the works itself in return for a reasonable increase in the rent
o tenant does not have to accept such an offer and can withdraw its notice
o if the tenant withdraws notice, the landlord has no right to carry out the works and increase the rent
o if the tenant REJECTS the landlord’s offer, the court cannot give the tenant authority to do the works itself - If the landlord does not offer to carry out the works itself, or object to the improvements within three months, or the court authorises the work:
o The tenant may lawfully carry them out, even if the lease contains an absolute covenant against the works
Qualified and fully qualified covenants?
- Many landlords will allow tenants to make non-structural alterations and changes to service media, but with consent
o Rationale - the landlord can retain control by imposing conditions about how the works are done and whether they will need to be removed and the property reinstated at the end of the term - Conditions, consent, etc. will typically be imposed in a separate document called a licence to alter
- Qualified covenant against alterations ?
prohibits alterations without the landlord’s consent
o s19(2) Landlord and Tenant Act 1927 - implies a term into a qualified covenant against making ‘improvements’ that the landlord cannot unreasonably withhold its consent
o s19(3) Landlord and Tenant Act 1927 - an increase in rent cannot be charged by the landlord as a condition of giving consent, provided no structural alterations are involved in the change
Meaning of ‘reasonable’ for alterations?
e economics of the landlord-tenant relationship (i.e., is what the tenant is proposing going to have some kind of financial/economic implication on the landlord’s ability to sell the reversion, etc.)
o If works in question will increase the value or usefulness of the property to the tenant, then they will constitute an improvement, even if they will result in the reduction in the value of the landlord’s reversionary interest
Compensation for improvements
- A tenant which has obtained prior authorisation to make the improvements by using s3 is entitled to claim compensation for improvements at the end of the term that ‘add to the letting value of the holding’ under s1 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1927
- In practice - Tenants usually obtain consent to carry out the alterations without using the s 3 statutory procedure
o most leases contain a tenant’s covenant to remove all alterations and reinstate the premises at the end of the term (so there are no improvements left in respect of which to claim compensation).
User and planning
- Landlords may choose to impose a tenant’s covenant which restricts the use of the property to a single purpose
o Example - Not to use the Premises other than as a restaurant. - Risk - A narrow clause might:
o put off a tenant who wants to retain the possibility of diversifying the business or disposing of the lease at a later date
o depress the rent on any rent review - Solution - landlord may impose a covenant which allows for the possibility of changing the user by making use of the categories set out in the Use Classes Order 1987
o Example - Not to use the Premises other than as a restaurant or such other use falling within Use Class E of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987. - Better solution - A landlord can impose greater control with a qualified covenant:
o Example - Not to use the Premises other than as a restaurant or such other use falling within Use Class E of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 as the Landlord may approve in writing. - NB there is no statutory implication that the landlord’s consent cannot be unreasonably withheld for user covenants
- Restriction - the landlord cannot charge a fine or an increased rent as a condition of giving consent, provided no structural alteration is involved
- Tenant’s preference - would prefer a fully qualified covenant:
o Not to use the Premises other than as a restaurant or such other use falling within Use Class E of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 as the Landlord may approve in writing (such approval not to be unreasonably withheld). - NB both landlord and tenant need to remember that change of use might necessitate planning permission as well.
Assignment - converting a qualified covenant into a fully qualified one?
- s19(1)(a) Landlord and Tenant Act 1927 - implies into any qualified covenant (not to assign without the landlord’s consent) that it be deemed to be subject to a proviso that such consent is not to be unreasonably withheld- converts a qualified covenant into a fully qualified covenant.