4

Landlord — and I the Tenant — have agreed everything in a Commercial Lease, except one verb! Originally Tenant proffered

All existing or future tenant legislation, rights and protection (e.g. against eviction or ejectment) prevail.

But then Landlord crossed out "prevail", and is insisting on "will not be affected".

All existing or future tenant legislation, rights and protection (e.g. against eviction or ejectment) will not be affected.

Tenant spoke to Landlord, and four of Landlord's solicitors — (i) an Associate, (ii) Partner, (iii) Head of Real Estate, and (iv) Managing Partner. But they all politely refused to explain their insistence on "will not be affected".

  1. Can you explain or speculate Landlord's insistence on "will not be affected"?

  2. Can you distinguish "prevail" vs. "will not be affected"? Thanks.

3
  • 1
    I’m sorry, but interpreting the particular choice of words in a contract clause is clearly legal advice, you need to hire your own solicitor to explain the difference.
    – Dale M
    Jul 24 at 2:00
  • For what it's worth, if a future law says that it applies to existing commercial leases notwithstanding any contrary provision in the lease, then it doesn't matter what the lease says.
    – phoog
    Jul 27 at 11:47
  • 1
    I must disagree that interpreting the meaning of contract terms always constitutes specific legal advice, and I urge users to vote to reopen this question. as I have done. Jul 29 at 3:42

1 Answer 1

2

If under current law the landlord has some claim to an exemption from tenant protection laws, using the word "prevail" might suggest that such exemption was being given up or canceled, while the alternate phrasing "will not be affected". would not imply giving up any such exemption. Otherwise IO can see n difference of effect.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.