Girlings logo
TOP
Make an
enquiry

Make an enquiry

Please complete the form below and a legal adviser will contact you.
By submitting your details through Make an enquiry your data will only be used to contact you regarding your enquiry.
  • Home
  • /
  • Latest
  • /
  • Break Notices – Important Ruling for Commercial Landlords
Girlings Latest 3 2
9
Dec
Break Notices – Important Ruling for Commercial Landlords
News

Is a tenant entitled to a refund if the break date is between rent payment dates?

The following ruling makes it clear that when negotiating a lease for a tenant that contains a break clause, the tenants' lawyers should advise their clients that they should seek a refund of rent and any other payments for the period from and excluding the break date up to and excluding the next rent payment date.

Marks and Spencer plc v BNP Paribas Securities Services Trust Company (Jersey) Ltd and another [2014] EWCA Civ 603

In this case the Supreme Court found in favour of the landlord, dismissing the tenant's appeal of the Court of Appeal decision.

The tenant (T) had exercised a break clause, ending the lease early. T sought a refund of parts of payments it had made in advance in respect of rent, service charge, car parking licence fee and insurance charges relating to the period after the break date. The issue of the repayment of the service charge had been settled during the High Court proceedings. By the time the matter came before the Court of Appeal, T was only seeking repayment of the rent, insurance charge and the car parking licence fee.

The Supreme Court, agreeing with the Court of Appeal, ruled that it was not appropriate to imply a term into the lease that entitled T to a refund of the rent, car parking licence fee and insurance charges that it had paid in advance in accordance with the express terms of the lease.

Landlord and tenant lawyers will be pleased to note that Lord Neuberger (who provided the leading judgment) approved the Court of Appeal decision in Ellis v Rowbotham [1900] 1 QB 740. In Ellis, the Court of Appeal held that the Apportionment Act 1870 did not apply to rents payable in advance, only those payable in arrear.

Some commentators had expressed doubt as to whether Ellis had been correctly decided. This decision now puts it beyond doubt.

For for further advice contact a member of our Commercial Property team.

Please read Reliance on information posted in our Terms of Website Use - see Legal section - before relying on this commentary.

Before relying on this commentary please read the Reliance on information posted section in our Terms of Website Use in our Legal section. Please note that specialist advice should be taken in relation to any specific queries and the information above is provided for general information purposes only.

upper shape

Our Experts

Chris Brightling

Head of Department
Corporate, Banking & Finance and Commercial Law

Jeremy Burke

Head of Department
Commercial Property

Amrita Bartram

Partner
Commercial Property

Caroline Armitage

Consultant Solicitor
Corporate, Banking & Finance, Commercial Law and Charities & Not for Profit

David Redgate

Partner
Commercial Property

Amy Husk

Senior Associate Solicitor
Commercial Property

Jonathan Masucci

Senior Associate Solicitor
Corporate, Banking & Finance and Commercial Law

Simon Stempien

Senior Associate Solicitor
Commercial Property

Sophie Robins

Senior Associate Solicitor
Commercial Property

Allison Simmons

Conveyancing Executive
Commercial Property

Macauley Cubitt

Trainee Solicitor
Commercial Property

Stay up to date

We would like to keep you informed with updates on legal developments, event invitations and Firm news by email, post, SMS/text and phone.
Subscribe