header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us

The ABCs of overage

© Copyright LexisNexis 2025. All Rights Reserved.
19 July 2024 / Fern Schofield , Michael Ranson
Issue: 8080 / Categories: Features , Profession , Property , Conveyancing
printer mail-detail
182211
Fern Schofield & Michael Ranson set out the various means of securing overage obligations
  • Securing overage obligations raises a variety of legal, practical and commercial difficulties.
  • In order to advise clients about how best to secure overage, practitioners need to be aware of a variety of legal principles, statutes and case law.
  • This article is a guide to those legal issues, with suggestions as to three different ways in which overage obligations might be secured and a warning about the use of restrictive covenants.

When it comes to securing overage obligations, a number of different options present themselves, each with their own advantages and disadvantages. Which is the best choice in the context of any given transaction will depend on the legal landscape and various practical and commercial priorities.

Why is it difficult to secure overage obligations?

Before turning to the different methods of securing obligations to pay overage, and the advantages and disadvantages of each, it is helpful to take a step back and consider

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

Read All
Sponsored by
Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

Gilson Gray—Jeremy Davy

Gilson Gray—Jeremy Davy

Partner appointed as head of residential conveyancing for England

DR Solicitors—Paul Edels

DR Solicitors—Paul Edels

Specialist firm enhances corporate healthcare practice with partner appointment

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Gold on Awaab’s Law & digital divorce
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
NLJ this week: AI in the dock—courts need literacy, not fear
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
NLJ this week: Landlords lose their upward climb
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
NLJ this week: Privy Council undresses the ‘shareholder rule’
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
NLJ this week: Regan’s case of the year
Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School and the Frenkel Topping Group—AKA The insider—crowns Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP as his case of 2025 in his latest column for NLJ. The High Court’s decision—that non-authorised employees cannot conduct litigation, even under supervision—has sent shockwaves through the profession. Regan calls it the year’s defining moment for civil practitioners and reproduces a ‘cut-out-and-keep’ summary of key rulings from Mr Justice Sheldon
Copyright © 2025 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll