As a general statement, it is only RICS members and RICS regulated firms that must comply with or have proper regard to the Service Charge Statement (see below). If the client and/or its surveyors are not RICS regulated, then they are not required to follow its provisions. As a general practice point, it is worth noting that non-RICS lawyers are not required to comply with the Service Charge Statement, but they should have regard to the fact that their RICS-registered clients, and/or their RICS-registered members, may have to comply with the Service Charge Statement. As to compliance by RICS-regulated clients and their

A right of way is an agreement that allows a person to pass and repass over land owned by another person. A right of way will usually be by way of an easement. A legal easement can be granted by a lease executed as a deed; if the lease is not executed as a deed the easement will take effect only as an equitable easement. Where the lease is a lease that is required to be registered (ie a lease for a term of seven years or more) the prescribed clauses should refer to any easements granted and the easements will be entered into the leasehold register in respect of the benefit of any easements granted by the lease. If the lease is not a prescribed

A commercial lease which contains a clause meeting certain requirements can be forfeited for a breach of the same. Such a lease can be forfeited through the obtaining of a court order, or by peaceable re-entry. Note that there are various notice requirements which must be followed in respect of certain breaches before forfeiture can take place. A tenant may apply for relief from forfeiture even after the landlord has re-let the property. This can cause the landlord difficulties, as if the application is successful, the original lease will be reinstated. As such, the lease between the new tenant and the original landlord would become an intermediate

Whether or not the tenant’s failure to respond to a rent increase notice will have resulted in the rent being reviewed at the level proposed by the landlord will depend on the precise terms of the rent review machinery. Some older leases contain prescriptive and formal rent review procedures, which may include a landlord having to serve a notice, followed by the tenant serving a counternotice. If the lease terms provided that if the tenant fails to serve a counternotice they will be ‘deemed’ as having agreed the rent at the

Section 17 of the Landlord and Tenant (Covenants) Act 1995 (LT(C)A 1995) provides that: ‘(1) This section applies where a person (“the former tenant”) is as a result of an assignment no longer a tenant under a tenancy but— (a) (in the case of a tenancy which is a new tenancy) he has under an authorised guarantee agreement guaranteed the performance by his assignee of a tenant covenant of the tenancy under which any fixed charge is payable; or (b) (in the case of any tenancy) he remains bound by such a covenant. […] (3) Where a person

Section 38A(1) and (3) of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 (LTA 1954) provides: '(1) The persons who will be the landlord and the tenant in relation to a tenancy to be granted for a term of years certain which will be a tenancy to which this Part of this Act applies may agree that the provisions of sections 24 to 28 of this Act shall be excluded in relation to that tenancy. (2)… (3) An agreement under subsection (1) above shall be void unless— (a) the landlord has served on the tenant a notice in the form, or substantially in the form, set

When serving a break notice the terms of the lease are of paramount importance. The lease itself sets out the requirements for notice, and these must be read carefully and strictly adhered to. Subject to that caveat, the following points may apply: It is crucial to identify the correct recipient of the notice. The landlords named in the lease may no longer be the correct recipients. If the break clause requires service on the 'landlord', this will usually

Where land is held by a company, there is no difficulty when directors or shareholders change. The land is held by the company which remains separate from those persons. They have no interest in the land and when a director resigns or a new one is appointed, there is no need to consider how the land is held. Where however a partnership wishes to occupy land, thought needs to be given as to how any interest in it will be held. The partnership only exists through its partners. There is no separate legal entity. Instead, it will be the individual partners who own the interest in the land. The maximum number of people to whom the legal interest in land may be conveyed is four (section 34(2) of the Law

Prohibitions against assigning etc can cover a range of situations depending on the wording. They may: • be limited to prohibiting ‘permitting’ or extend to ‘suffering’ • be a prohibition against ‘parting with possession’ (which includes assigning or subletting) or ‘sharing possession’ or • be wide enough to prohibit the ‘occupation or use of the premises by another person’, alternatively ‘sharing occupation or use with another person’ Of these, a prohibition against permitting another person or company using the premises is about as wide as it gets. Here, the word ‘use’ may be contrasted with the other word which often appears in this scenario: ‘occupation’. ‘Occupation’ is a concept (as distinguished from ‘possession’; which connotes a legal right to exclude others) which is well known to property

Nature of the occupation and method of termination Consideration needs to be given to the nature of the occupation (including the extent to which the directors are continuing to use the premises for the same business as the business of the dissolved company) in order to ascertain whether it is or was a licence, tenancy at Will or a periodic tenancy. If it was a periodic tenancy, it will be automatically protected under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 (LTA 1954). The method of termination will depend both on the nature of the occupation and on the impact of the dissolution of the company. For more

Where rent is payable in advance but the lease ends before the end of the period for which rent is payable, the landlord is entitled to the whole of the rent for that period (see Commentary: Apportionment in respect of time: Hill and Redman's Law of Landlord and Tenant [1807]). Where a tenant company goes into liquidation and the liquidator disclaims the lease, the rights, interests and liabilities of the tenant under the lease are terminated, as from the date of disclaimer. If the company was the original

The terms on which the landlord can forfeit will be set out in the lease. Without seeing this document, we are unable to provide a full answer specific to the circumstances of this case. Where a tenant’s breach is for a breach other than non-payment of rent, a landlord can only forfeit a lease after serving a section 146 notice under the Law of Property Act 1925 and providing the tenant a reasonable time to remedy the breach (if remediable). The landlord must also ensure that any other requirements under the lease have been satisfied. The test of whether a right to forfeit