There has been much commentary in the property press over the
last few days reporting on the eagerly anticipated outcome of BNP
Paribas' appeal against the High Court's ruling last year
that allowed M&S (BNP's tenant) to recover £1.1m of
rent and other charges after exercising their break right.
The Court of Appeal allowed the landlord's appeal and ruled
that, in the absence of an express term in the lease, there was no
implied term that a landlord must refund to its tenant rent paid
for the period after a break date.
What does this mean for tenants?
- The key lesson to be learned from this case is that, now more
than ever, it is important for any agreement reached on the terms
of a break clause to be reflected in the drafting. If the tenant
requires rent paid for the period after the break to be refunded,
this must be expressly provided for in the lease.
