The Coronavirus Act - provisions to protect business tenants from forfeiture
Under the Coronavirus Act a right of forfeiture (in which a landlord ends the lease early and takes back the premises) cannot be exercised in respect of non-payment of any rent (or other sums payable by a tenant to a landlord under a lease) until 30 June 2020.
Please note: the information contained in this legal update is correct as of the original date of publication
Under the Coronavirus Act a right of forfeiture (in which a landlord ends the lease early and takes back the premises) cannot be exercised in respect of non-payment of any rent (or other sums payable by a tenant to a landlord under a lease) until 30 June 2020, though this could be extended.
There is no requirement to demonstrate a Coronavirus link or indeed show any level of hardship in order to benefit from this protection.
The protection only applies to the prevention of forfeiture and so other methods of enforcement are seemingly still open to landlords at present. For example another route for landlords is the statutory demand process under which a landlord can make a formal demand for payment of a debt within 21 days failing which a winding up petition can be presented. However, it has been reported that the Insolvency Service is currently considering similar adjustments designed to prevent companies currently unable to meet debts due to Coronavirus from being forced into insolvency processes in the coming months. And though it has not been ruled out at present presumably the government would not have intended that Commercial Rent Arrears Recovery (CRAR) be used as an alternative to bypass this protection. CRAR allows a landlord to take control of a tenant's goods and sell them in order to recover an equivalent value to the rent arrears. We may see more guidance on this in due course.
Any failure to pay rent during the period of protection will be ignored when considering if the landlord has established a statutory ground under Part 2 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 for refusing to renew a lease enjoying the protection of that Act. This is welcome protection for tenants who would otherwise have feared that non-payment during the protected period might be used against them by their landlord as a reason to refuse a statutory lease renewal.
The Coronavirus Act gives some welcome clarity around waiving rights of forfeiture. The term ‘waiver’ means that a landlord can lose its right to forfeit by taking action that recognises the lease as continuing to exist (e.g. by demanding rent or exercising CRAR). The Act states that, during the period of protection, no conduct by the landlord (other than an express waiver in writing) will be regarded as waiving the landlord’s right of forfeiture. Landlords may otherwise have felt the need to be more defensive in their actions and correspondence for fear of inadvertently waiving this right.
Non-payment of rent will still be a tenant’s breach of the lease and the rent remains due. It therefore must be paid in full at the end of the protection period otherwise a landlord will once again have the right to forfeit. For example any tenant that has not paid the March quarter’s rent will need to pay the March quarter’s rent as well as the June quarter’s rent by the end of the current protection period (or as extended). So while this is a welcome initial protection for tenants, there will be problems further down the line if a large amount of rent will still be due before businesses have had an opportunity to resume trade and recover sufficiently to meet this liability. It is also worth bearing in mind that the protection relates to non-payment of rent (and other sums due under a lease) specifically, and forfeiture is therefore seemingly still a possibility during this period if the trigger was insolvency of the tenant, or another breach of the lease such as damage to the premises by the tenant.
As can be seen, these measures do not mean that non-payment of rent is entirely without consequence. In particular, one thing a tenant should check is the wording of any future break provision it may wish to operate to ensure that the conditions are not so widely worded as to prevent the operation of the break because of the tenant’s historic failure to pay the rent when it fell due. We have found this more likely to be an issue in older leases.
We have seen a mixed response from landlords to tenants’ proposals for reduced rent, monthly rent and deferred rent. The clarity of this forfeiture protection coming into force will hopefully now give some time for landlords and tenants to reach agreement on fair rent adjustments, to ensure that everyone shares the pain during this unprecedented period.
Related expertise
You may be interested in...
Legal Update
ASA bans “misleading” Huel and ZOE ads endorsed by Dragon’s Den Star
Opinion
Choose your words wisely: Balancing inclusivity and employees’ beliefs at work
Guide
Guidance for manufacturers of EVs and HEVs in the UK: ASA's non-exhaustive electric vehicle advertising guidance
Legal Update
(Deep)fake it till you make it? The ASA's role in regulating false celebrity endorsements
Press Release
Browne Jacobson strengthens Irish Corporate team with appointment of Principal Associate James Byrne
Legal Update
The benefits of good governance in sport
Press Release
Browne Jacobson to lead discussions on the future of real estate and infrastructure at this year’s UKREiiF 2024 event
Press Release
Browne Jacobson acquires business of real estate practitioner Paul Taylor Solicitors
Legal Update
The Baltimore bridge collapse: One of the biggest losses in maritime insurance history?
Legal Update
Understanding the ICO's new fining guidance
Legal Update
Unravelling the challenges and opportunities in UK sports governance
Legal Update
ASA ruling on Calvin Klein FKA Twigs advertisement
Press Release
Browne Jacobson successful for National Lottery in Court of Appeal
Opinion
Caregivers at work: Navigating new carer's leave regulations
Opinion
EHRC publishes new guidance on menopause and the workplace
Opinion
BBC personality wins appeal on IR35 status
Legal Update
Covid BI litigation (Autumn 2023): Insurance coverage disputes update
Press Release
Browne Jacobson advise Maven Equity Finance on investment in Traverse Associates
Press Release
Three strong restructuring and insolvency team join Browne Jacobson
Legal Update
How to negotiate better ‘green’ provisions in your leases
Opinion
The Metaverse's influence on real estate: Implications for commercial retail clients and law firms
Guide
How to manage retail sector supply contracts and avoid disputes
Legal Update
Utilising prime retail sites to improve the health of our nation
Legal Update
A new era of opportunity for high street regeneration?
Opinion
Practical points from High Court ruling that Tesco has infringed Lidl’s IP rights in its famous yellow circle logo
Press Release
Corporate dealmakers advise Sodexo Live! on its move to 100% stake in global sports, travel and hospitality provider STH
Legal Update
Pitfalls for retailers to avoid when offering access to ‘buy now, pay later’ products
Press Release
Browne Jacobson’s Manchester dealmakers advise Spatial Global on its acquisition of Heathrow based freight specialist Hollyport Logistics
Opinion
Supreme court rules on retail tenant's service charge bill
Published Article - Consumer Duty
Consumer duty part 3 - 'The drill-down' into the 'cross-cutting' rules
On-Demand
The UK's green agenda - the outcomes of COP27 and actions since COP26
Press Release
Browne Jacobson’s retail lawyers advise Wilko on its strategic £48m sale and leaseback of Nottinghamshire distribution centre to DHL
Press Release
Suzanne Harlow joins Browne Jacobson as Non-Executive Director
Law firm Browne Jacobson is pleased to announce that Suzanne Harlow has been appointed Non-Executive Director of its Retail, Consumer & Logistics sector.
Legal Update
Fashion retailers: Is this the end for free returns?
Published Article
AI generated designs on retail products
Every AI will have its own terms of use. DALL·E 2’s Terms of Use dated 3 November 2022 specify that as between a user and Open AI, a user owns their prompts and uploads. Open AI also assigns to the user all rights in any images generated by DALL·E 2 for that user (subject to the user complying with those Terms of Use, and to a licence to use inputs and output to develop and improve the services).
Published Article - Consumer Duty
Consumer duty part 2 - 'The drill-down' into the 'cross-cutting' rules
Published Article
Luxury brands and sustainability: The challenges and solutions
Legal Update
The Retained EU Law
Created at the end of the Brexit transition period, Retained EU Law is a category of domestic law that consists of EU-derived legislation retained in our domestic legal framework by the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018. This was never intended to be a permanent arrangement as parliament promised to deal with retained EU law through the Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill (the “Bill”).