Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
New Strategies for Renegotiating Office Leases Post-COVID
During COVID-19, industries, business models and interpersonal rules all have shifted dramatically, thrusting a knife into the hearts of many businesses. Those businesses often have leases for office or retail spaces which were a valuable part of their business model in a pre-pandemic environment, but now, suddenly, these leases are burdensome and unusable.
We believe that current circumstances present an opportunity for tenants to use new strategies to renegotiate or even terminate leases. This article looks at conventional legal strategies that may provide grounds for lease termination before turning to consider another, third, approach. We begin with a look at conventional legal strategies that may provide grounds for lease termination before turning to consider another approach.
The First Ground: Contractual Law
As always in a contract context, inquiry starts with the agreement's language. Two frequently occurring lease provisions address force majeure and quiet enjoyment.
Force majeure contract clauses have become a central focus for tenants looking to terminate office leases. These clauses provide that under limited, stated circumstances, one or both parties will be excused from performance under a contract. Courts interpret these clauses narrowly, which means that if there is not an explicit reference to the cause for non-performance in the force majeure clause, such as a reference to bacterial or viral infections, then there will be no excuse for failure to perform under that clause. Beyond that, the force majeure event must actually prevent a party's performance, not just make it uneconomic.
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?