EG 9-11-1911-11-2019, 11:02
Palindromic EG date! 9-11-19
P.36 Co-living is the next new thing, but there are planning issues to overcome, but it is something to look out for. I've stayed at The Collective in Canary Wharf and it is an amazing concept (if you can cope with the noise of the DLR rumbling past)!
p.53 Pt 2 of the differences between Scottish & English law, commercial leases. Everything is different in Scotland, the ’54 Act and other L&T statutes don’t apply, the rent dates, the tax,dilaps, repairs, the lack of registration - you name it. Don’t let English clients think ‘oh, its just the same really’.
P. 55 Break clauses (yet again) - the problems of reinstatement obligations as a precondition to operation of a break clause, the Riverside, Goldman Sachs & Avocet cases. Good summary of this problematic area.
p.56. The Food Hall in shopping centres. Excellent resumé of the ways to structure a food hall offering - licence vs lease, service charge issues, rent arrangements, exclusivity, keep open obligations, etc. There is a lot more to this than you would think
p.58 Relief from forfeiture is available for possessory rights over land. Vauxhall Motors v Manchester Ship Canal 2019 SC 46. This concerned the loss of a licence to discharge surface water and treated trade effluent to a canal - an often hotly contested issue. The failure to pay a £50 pa licence fee resulted in the loss of rights worth £300,000 pa! The Supreme Court held that such rights were sufficiently ‘proprietary’ in nature in the particular facts of the case to allow relief from their forfeiture, but the court held that this did not mean that every licensee would be entitled to relief.
p.58 Tel Code - Cornerstone V Compton Beauchamp 2019 CA 1755, first CA decision on the Code. Service of notice by Cornerstone instead of Vodaphone meant notice was invalid - a chink the armour for embattled owners to exploit perhaps?
p.59 Student Housing. Top tips for making sure developers don’t miss the vital start of the adcademic year, related cost issues, and quality problems if you rush or skimp. Nightmare example of 9,000 snagging items and students put up in hotels/lender ste- in nightmares! (Who paid for that then?)
p.60 Business rates. Article lamenting the slow pace of change in this area but highlighting one or two steps you can use to reduce the rates
p.61 Varying comm long lease user covenants under s.84 LPA25. Shaviram Normandy v Basingstoke & Deane BC UKUT 256 - leases for more than 40 years, after 25 years T can make application to UTT to vary or discharge restrictive covenants. Big office building, long lease, office user clause, rent sharing provisions (L got 15%) with no mnimum rent,and covenant to keep fully let. Building empty and in disrepair. T wanted to use Permitted Development rights to turn int into resi flats on ASTs. L (council) wanted T to repair and let to office tenants instead. T applies to UTT for modification of user covenant. Did L stain any benefit or advantage from the user restriction in the lease? On the facts, no, so user modified but not the clause requiring L to approve the market rent of lettings. Important case for T’s with long lease offices who want to use the PD rights.