The lease provided for a rent review under which the rent might either be increased or decreased. The landlord had chosen not to exercise the clause in view of falling rents. The tenant purported to do so. The landlord said that it alone had the right to start the procedure.
Held: There was no presumption in law that either party had the right to commence the procedure. Everything depended upon the form of clause chosen by the parties. In this lease, the right was exercisable only by the landlord.
Judges:
Patten J
Citations:
[2005] EWHC 299 (Ch), Times 15-Mar-2005
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council v Host Group Limited CA 1988
A lease of various buildings including a public house required the rent review to be carried out on the premise that the demise consisted of a bare site. The issue was whether the terms of the hypothetical letting and the valuation formula were to . .
Cited – Equity and Law Life Assurance Society plc v Bodfield Ltd CA 1987
The court discussed the nature and purpose of rent review clauses: ‘There is no doubt that the general object of a rent review clause, which provides that the rent cannot be reduced on a review, is to provide the landlord with some measure of relief . .
Cited – British Gas Corporation v Universities Superannuation Scheme ChD 1986
The lease had a five yearly rent review, to be the highest of the current rent the rack rental value at the relevant rate. The rack rent was calculated under a hypothetical lease containing the same provisions (save for rent). The tenant sought a . .
Cited – Royal Bank of Scotland v Jennings, Pezaro and Circuitpoint (Brewery Road) Limited CA 24-Oct-1996
The reddendum in the lease provided for a rent review: ‘there will be a rent review for each of the review periods’. The express machinery for such review could only be initiated by the landlord, but in refusing to initiate a review the landlord was . .
Cited – Addin v Secretary of State for the Environment ChD 1997
The lease provided for seven-yearly rent reviews. The landlord argued that the reddendum gave the right to trigger a review to him alone. If he chose not to do so, then no review would take place. The tenant contended that the opening words of the . .
Cited – United Scientific Holdings v Burnley Borough Council HL 1978
The House was asked whether a failure by a lessor to keep strictly to the timetable laid down in a rent review clause in a lease necessarily deprived the lessor of the benefit of the rent review.
Held: A stipulation as to time in an option . .
Cited – Australian Mutual Provident Society v National Mutual Life Association of Australasia Limited 1995
(New Zealand Court of Appeal) The Court was asked whether a rent review clause which provided for an open review was inconsistent with the rent review being operable by the lessor alone. The lease did not contain a ratchet clause, or upwards only . .
Cited – Board of Trustees of the National Provident Fund v Shortland Securities Limited 1996
(New Zealand Court of Appeal) The court considered whether a review in a lease without a ratchet (upwards only) rent review clause could be exercised only at the instigation of the landlord: ‘The fact that as a consequence the parties agreed upon . .
Cited – Board of Trustees of the National Provident Fund v Shortland Securities Limited PC 1997
(New Zealand) Lord Hoffmann: ‘The expression ‘ratchet clause’ is well understood in New Zealand to mean a particular type of clause, namely a provision such as cl 3.5(c)(i) which prevents the reviewed rent from being lower than the previous rent. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Landlord and Tenant
Updated: 01 October 2022; Ref: scu.223309