header-logo header-logo

21 June 2012 / Mark Sefton , Oliver Radley-gardener
Issue: 7519 / Categories: Features , Landlord&tenant , Property
printer mail-detail

Out of kilter?

Tenant’s break options—what do you have to pay? By Mark Sefton & Oliver Radley-Gardener

 

The Feast of the Annunciation, the Nativity of St John the Baptist, the Feast of the Archangel St Michael, and the Nativity of Christ, are all feast days in the mediaeval calendar of saints. But history lingers on, and they are also, under most modern commercial leases, the dates when the tenant will have agreed to pay the rent, quarterly in advance. They are, of course, the usual quarter days of 25 March, 24 June, 29 September and 25 December.

It is not uncommon for commercial leases to include a tenant’s break option, and, where they do, the date on which the tenant can break the lease is often less religiously tied to the major festivals of the Christian cycle. Sometimes, in other words, the break date falls somewhere between two rent days.

Conditions apply

Normally, the break option will be conditional on the tenant having paid all the rent due up to
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

Clarke Willmott—Anita Rasaratnam

Clarke Willmott—Anita Rasaratnam

Clarke Willmott strengthens social housing development offering with senior London appointment

Trowers & Hamlins—David Meecham

Trowers & Hamlins—David Meecham

Trowers strengthens Birmingham real estate team with partner hire

Blake Morgan—Jennifer Ray & Louise Culleton

Blake Morgan—Jennifer Ray & Louise Culleton

Blake Morgan expands private client and regulatory teams with new legal directors

NEWS
A mood of cautious optimism has enveloped the criminal law sector following indications the Prime Minister may abandon planned jury reforms
Helping to source the services and providers you need
The Senior Courts Costs Office has clarified that judges conducting detailed assessment proceedings cannot order security for costs—a ruling that may leave successful parties exposed to further litigation expense
Rejecting a generous settlement can prove an expensive mistake, as two recent high-profile cases demonstrate
The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) continues to show that failing to disclose regulatory issues can attract harsher consequences than the original misconduct itself
back-to-top-scroll