header-logo header-logo

19 September 2014 / Donald Lambert
Issue: 7622 / Categories: Features , Landlord&tenant , Property
printer mail-detail

Make or break

property_lambert

Donald Lambert discusses not just any break clause, but an M&S break clause

In Marks & Spencer Plc v BNP Paribas [2014] EWCA Civ 603, [2014] All ER (D) 147 (May), Marks & Spencer Plc (M&S) held leases of four floors of offices in Paddington. The leases ran until 2 February 2018 but M&S had the benefit of break clauses in all of the leases operable as at 24 January 2012 or 24 January 2014.

The break clauses were subject to a number of conditions, the most important of which were:

  • on the break date there were to be no arrears of the basic rent; and
  • to exercise the 2012 break, the tenant was also to make a payment to the landlord of approximately £900,000 plus VAT “on or prior to” the break date (the break sum).

The break sum was approximately the basic yearly rent for one floor. Clearly the tenant would save substantial sums by correctly operating the break clauses.

M&S made all payments required to exercise the breaks including

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Projects and rail practices strengthened by director hire in London

DWF—Stephen Hickling

DWF—Stephen Hickling

Real estate team in Birmingham welcomes back returning partner

Ward Hadaway—44 appointments

Ward Hadaway—44 appointments

Firm invests in national growth with 44 appointments across five offices

NEWS
The Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 transformed criminal justice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ed Cape of UWE and Matthew Hardcastle and Sandra Paul of Kingsley Napley trace its ‘seismic impact’
Operational resilience is no longer optional. Writing in NLJ this week, Emma Radmore and Michael Lewis of Womble Bond Dickinson explain how UK regulators expect firms to identify ‘important business services’ that could cause ‘intolerable levels of harm’ if disrupted
Criminal juries may be convicting—or acquitting—on a misunderstanding. Writing in NLJ this week Paul McKeown, Adrian Keane and Sally Stares of The City Law School and LSE report troubling survey findings on the meaning of ‘sure’
The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has narrowly preserved a key weapon in its anti-corruption arsenal. In this week's NLJ, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers examines Guralp Systems Ltd v SFO, in which the High Court ruled that a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) remained in force despite the company’s failure to disgorge £2m by the stated deadline
As the drip-feed of Epstein disclosures fuels ‘collateral damage’, the rush to cry misconduct in public office may be premature. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke of Hill Dickinson warns that the offence is no catch-all for political embarrassment. It demands a ‘grave departure’ from proper standards, an ‘abuse of the public’s trust’ and conduct ‘sufficiently serious to warrant criminal punishment’
back-to-top-scroll