Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Tenant estoppel certificates are generally perceived by most tenants as an occasional innocuous annoyance, and in most cases they are just that. There are certain instances, however, where the careless execution by a tenant of an estoppel can lead to serious potential legal difficulties in the future.
Upon receiving a request by a landlord for an estoppel, a prudent tenant must do two things. First, review the lease to determine what the tenant is required to certify. Landlords (and their lenders, prospective purchasers, and their respective counsel) frequently like to add various provisions to the estoppel that amount to modifications of the lease or disguised subordination and attornment provisions. If the lease does not require the tenant to deliver the additional requested provisions, there is no reason for the tenant to comply unless the tenant receives some benefit for doing so. Second, the tenant must carefully review the provisions of the estoppel to make sure that it is factually correct. Landlords and/or their managing agents or attorneys frequently take the form estoppel and fill in the blanks based on a rent roll or lease abstract without necessarily referring back to the original lease document. This process often leads to errors in basic lease status such as rent, term, renewal options, etc.
A tenant does not want to certify to incorrect information. Another potential serious pitfall for the tenant is inadvertently neglecting to recite in the estoppel all lease modifications and amendments, including any letters which arguably alter the terms of the lease. Unless these documents are specifically referred to in the estoppel, the tenant may later be estopped from asserting any rights pursuant to such documents.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
UCC Sections 9406(d) and 9408(a) are one of the most powerful, yet least understood, sections of the Uniform Commercial Code. On their face, they appear to override anti-assignment provisions in agreements that would limit the grant of a security interest. But do these sections really work?