Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Considerations in Drafting and Negotiating Early Lease Terminations
The first impression one may have when preparing to draft an early termination agreement is that such a document should be a simple matter. It is true that simplicity and brevity in drafting are, in most circumstances, admirable qualities, and it is equally true that we frequently draft and negotiate documents that are much more complex than most lease termination agreements. Nevertheless, as with any effort to document a transaction, care must be taken in the preparation and negotiation of such an agreement to avoid overlooking potential risks and to protect the client's interests. This article explores some considerations in documenting the early termination of a lease, though not necessarily in order of importance. Although some specific suggestions are made and some sample provisions are included, the primary intent of this discussion is to alert the leasing practitioner to various issues and pitfalls that may be encountered.
The Introduction
The recitals or other introductory provisions should clearly identify the underlying lease and all amendments, addenda, and other modification documents. As obvious as it may seem, the drafter should take particular care to recite the correct name and date of the underlying lease and each related document; it is good practice to add at the end of the detailed description a phrase such as 'as the same may have been further amended.' This all-inclusive list of prior documents should be defined collectively as the 'Lease' for purposes of the termination agreement. The goal, of course, is to be certain that there is no doubt as to the identity of the documents and relationships, which are the subject of the termination, and to declare the intent of the parties clearly to terminate those documents and relationships.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
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
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
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
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.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
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.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
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.
The Anti-Assignment Override Provisions
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?