Lease renewal — Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, Part II — Terms of new lease — Landlord proposing redevelopment — Whether new lease should have break clause — Break clause inserted
The plaintiff holds an underlease of premises in Paternoster Square, adjoining St Paul’s Cathedral, London, from the defendant. The area is the subject of proposals for its comprehensive redevelopment, a matter of great public interest. In September 1986 the plaintiff served notice on the defendant under section 26 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 requesting a new lease and specifying the date of commencement as August 25 1987. In October 1986 the defendant served a counternotice that any application for a new lease would be opposed on ground (f) of section 30(1) of the 1954 Act.
The plaintiff commenced proceedings applying for a new lease and issued a summons to have certain issues decided. In the event the parties agreed that the issues to be decided were the term of the new lease and whether the lease should contain a break clause in favour of the lessor.
Held The evidence of the defendant showed that the various interests in Paternoster Square were in favour of the area’s redevelopment and so was the local planning authority. There was every possibility of the development proceeding. Accordingly it was right to insert a break clause in the new lease. A term of 14 years was appropriate for the new lease, commencing from the date of the issue of the summons on December 9 1986. The break clause should give the right to the lessor to terminate the lease on giving not less than six months’ notice.
Adams v Green
(1978) 247 EG 49 and
Edwards (JH) & Sons v Central London Commercial Estates
(1984) 271 EG 697 considered.
Terence Cullen QC and Stephen Furst (instructed by Hamlin Slowe) appeared for the plaintiff; and David Neuberger QC and Kirk Reynolds (instructed by Ashurst Morris Crisp) appeared for the defendant.
