Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Self-Help and Set-Off Rights: A Primer

By David Pezza
September 26, 2007

'Rent is an independent covenant.' These are words historically coveted by nearly every landlord. In most cases, interestingly, the independent nature of the payment of rent is not troubling to tenants or their counsel. In some jurisdictions, the concept of 'dependant covenants' is surfacing if the parties do not specify otherwise. From time to time, however, a tenant will require the landlord to insert provisions providing the right to self-help and/or the ability to set-off against rent, concepts that are contrary to the independent covenant doctrine. For well-heeled landlords, this is problem enough. Add a lender to the mix, particularly in instances where consent to the lease is required, and the matter quickly becomes complicated. The landlord's interests lie in keeping others from acting on its behalf with respect to its property and preserving its cash flow. The tenant's interests lie in making sure that the landlord performs its obligations under the lease and, if the tenant is required to act for the landlord, that the tenant has a source of funds to reimburse it for doing so. Finally, lenders are most interested in stable cash flow, continued loan repayment, and the avoidance of disputes to which they may become a party.

Reasons for Tenant Requests

Though reasons for tenant requests for self-help and the right to set-off against rent vary, the main reason for tenant self-help rights is to complete an unfinished landlord maintenance or construction obligation, while the main reason for the right to set-off against rent is related to the initial construction of the tenant's space. With tenant improvement allowances exceeding $50 per square foot for new construction or complete renovation, a 10,000-square-foot-tenant will recognize a half-million dollar construction risk. If the landlord does not perform its construction obligation, and the tenant takes over the work and pays for it, the tenant will not recover its half-million dollar investment for 20 months, assuming a $30-per-square-foot annual gross rent to set-off against. On the other hand, and notwithstanding its default in performance, lost rent is a disaster for both the landlord and the lender who is counting on the same to service its debt.

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • 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

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws Image

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 Image

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 Image

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 Image

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?

Fresh Filings Image

Notable recent court filings in entertainment law.