Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
In the course of negotiating a retail lease, landlords are often requested by tenants to pay a portion of the tenant's cost of construction of the premises. The manner in which the landlord would make such a payment is commonly called a 'construction allowance,' whereby a portion of the tenant's construction cost is defrayed by a payment made by the landlord, which payment may or may not be incorporated into the rental structure that will then be owed by the tenant during the term of the lease.
Several issues arise when contemplating the payment of a construction allowance to the tenant. In particular, issues such as the manner and timing for payment of the construction allowance, documentation required for the payment, and repayment in the event of a default by the tenant, should all be considered when addressing the issue of the construction allowance in the lease. This article discusses the foregoing issues and addresses various manners in which these issues can be dealt with in the lease.
Manner and Timing of Payment
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.
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 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.
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?