Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
In the Spotlight: Renovation of Existing Buildings
As commercial landlords in cities nationwide continue to look toward renovating or converting their commercial properties to other uses, and in particular into residential condominiums, many do not fully consider the dynamics between the existing tenants and the conversion process, which can result in decreased profits for the entire conversion or renovation project. Often, the interests of the existing tenants and renovating landlords are irreconcilably adverse to each other. Any landlord that fails to consider the 'cross-purpose dynamics' between the existing tenant's interests and its own interests in renovating or converting the property places itself in a common trap. Unsuspecting landlords that may think they are undertaking a simple and profitable conversion find that the renovation process can prove costly and fraught with contentiousness and hostility. Careful consideration of a few key issues can help landlords be sensitive to and avoid problems that arise from the cross-purpose dynamics inherent in many commercial renovations.
1) Be Prepared to Meet Obligations to the Existing Tenants.
Not every tenant can be per- suaded to vacate its premises be- fore its lease terminates, even when the landlord offers incentives. Consequently, in situations where commercial landlords will be renovating or converting a building that is already occupied by existing tenants, one important consideration for landlords is that they will be obligated to continue to provide services and maintain the building in reasonably good condition while, at the same time, they are tearing it down and rebuilding it. While the landlord's responsibilities vary from situation to situation and are necessarily dependent upon the specific property, landlords can expect that they will be required to continue to keep some things the same or consistent throughout the term of the renovation for the benefit of the existing tenants, notwithstanding the fact that this complicates or runs contrary to the renovation plan.
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.
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.
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.
Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?