• news-banner

    Expert Insights

Gaining insights on forfeiture

Emma Preece, Senior Associate at our Firm, and Andy Creer, Barrister at Landmark Chambers, answer a pair of questions on forfeiture.

Modern leases provide that rent falls due whether it is formally demanded or not. But while your rent likely falls due on the morning of the date for payment, the rent is not unpaid until after midnight. You would not be in arrears until 26 March: see Dibble v Bowater & Morgan (1853) 2 EL & BL 564.

In calculating time, the general rule is where an instrument provides that a certain time must elapse, then this means clear days: see Zoan v Rouamba [2000] EWCA Civ 8 and Carapanayoti & Co Ltd v Comptoir Commercial Andre & Cie SA
[1971] EWCA Civ 1203. (Note that there are exceptions).

Here, the whole 21 days has to elapse before the right of re-entry is exercisable. 26 March is day one, 15 April is day 21 and the landlord can re-enter the next day. This can be via peaceably re-entering the property (eg changing the locks), or by serving a claim for possession on you. The issuing of proceedings does not end the lease: Billson and others v Residential Apartments Ltd [1992] 1 AC 494; [1992] 1 EGLR 43.

The landlord would need to ensure it hasn’t waived the right to forfeit the lease by acting in a manner that treats the lease as continuing once the right has arisen. This doesn’t appear to have happened here, but if the landlord had waived the right to forfeit the lease but went on to change the locks, this is likely to amount to an unlawful forfeiture.

Question

I am a tenant of a commercial premises in Reading, from which I run an independent coffee shop. My lease commenced on 1 October 2022 for a term of five years. The lease provides that rent is to be paid quarterly on the usual quarter days. I always paid the rent on time until the business started to struggle 10 months’ ago. This is due, in my view, to rising costs of living, and also because the area in which the building is located is subject to development works, which has reduced the footfall and impacted the ambience. I reached a payment plan with my landlord to cover the rent due on 29 September and 25 December 2023 (and I was able to adhere to this). I am unable to pay the rent due on 25 March 2024 and despite my suggestion to enter into a further payment plan (or even surrender my lease), my landlord hasn’t responded to my correspondence. In fact, I haven’t heard from my landlord since the December quarter at all. When can the landlord regain possession of my property if I don’t pay?

Answer

If the lease provides a right of re-entry 21 days after the rent is unpaid, then the earliest date on which the landlord can regain possession is 16 April 2024.

Explanation

From what you’ve said, no right of reentry has arisen. You make no mention of any section 146 notice, which the landlord is obliged to serve in relation to breaches of the lease (other than nonpayment of rent), prior to taking steps to forfeit it. Had a right to re-enter arisen, then peaceable re-entry requires some form of actual physical act where the landlord intends it to be, and it amounts to, an “unequivocal retaking of possession of the premises”. It is questionable whether the failure to provide you with an entry code would amount to an unequivocal act, as it could be a simple oversight. We would need to know that any request for an entry code had been refused. Re-entry on to part of the premises may constitute re-entry on to the whole, though this depends on the wording of the forfeiture clause in your lease. While all cases involving forfeiture are fact-specific, it is unlikely that excluding you from the car park alone would be sufficient if you were still able to gain entry to the coffee shop. The intention of the landlord would be material. In the case of NPS (40GP) Ltd v Liberty Commodities Ltd [2023] EWHC 2137 (Ch); [2023] PLSCS 154, the landlord sought a declaration that the lease was continuing, where the tenant asserted that it had been forfeited by peaceable re-entry when the landlord upgraded a ground-floor entry barrier system and the tenant was not given new keycards. The court held that deactivating the barrier system in the course of planned works did not forfeit the lease and there was no evidence that the tenant’s employees had been refused access, as none of them had requested new keycards (the demised premises were vacant at the time).

Question

In addition to the rent issue, the landlord is carrying out some works to the rear car park, which includes installing a new barrier entry system. When I went in on Saturday morning, I couldn’t get into the car park to use my designated space. Some of the other tenants said they had been given entry codes by the landlord, but for some reason I hadn’t. Is there any way I can rely on the landlord’s failure to do this as evidence that they have terminated my lease? I am concerned about my ongoing liabilities, particularly as the coffee shop is in my personal name.

Answer

No. 


This Q&A was originally published by Estates Gazette on 9 March 2024.

Our thinking

  • Business over Breakfast: Arbitration is cheaper – Myth or Reality?

    Thomas R. Snider

    Events

  • Fiona Edmond writes for The Law Society Gazette on taking maternity leave as a Deputy Senior Partner

    Fiona Edmond

    In the Press

  • The UK’s March 2024 Budget: how the proposed new tax rules will work for US-connected clients

    Sangna Chauhan

    Insights

  • Takeover Panel consults on narrowing the scope of the Takeover Code

    Jodie Dennis

    Insights

  • Nick Hurley and Annie Green write for Employee Benefits on the impact of dropping the real living wage pledge

    Nick Hurley

    In the Press

  • The UK’s March 2024 budget: Offshore trusts - have reports of their demise been greatly exaggerated?

    Sophie Dworetzsky

    Insights

  • Playing with FYR: planning opportunities offered by the UK’s proposed four-year regime for newcomers to the UK

    Catrin Harrison

    Insights

  • James Broadhurst writes for the Financial Times’ Your Questions column on inheriting company shares

    James Broadhurst

    In the Press

  • Cara Imbrailo and Ilona Bateson write for Fashion Capital on pop-up shops

    Cara Imbrailo

    In the Press

  • City AM quotes Charlotte Duly on the importance of business branding

    Charlotte Duly

    In the Press

  • Personnel Today quotes Rose Carey on Italy’s new digital nomad visa

    Rose Carey

    In the Press

  • Regime change: The beginning of the end of the remittance basis

    Dominic Lawrance

    Insights

  • Essential Intelligence – UAE Fraud, Asset Tracing & Recovery

    Sara Sheffield

    Insights

  • IFA Magazine quotes Julia Cox on the possibility of more tax cuts before the general election

    Julia Cox

    In the Press

  • ‘One plus one makes two': Court of Protection finds conflict of interest within law firm structure

    Katie Foulds

    Insights

  • City AM quotes Charlotte Duly on Tesco’s Clubcard rebrand after losing battle with Lidl

    Charlotte Duly

    In the Press

  • Michael Powner writes for Raconteur on AI and automating back-office roles

    Michael Powner

    In the Press

  • Arbitration: Getting value for your money

    Daniel McDonagh

    Insights

  • Portfolio Adviser quotes Richard Ellis on the FCA's first public findings against former fund manager Neil Woodford

    Richard Ellis

    In the Press

  • eprivateclient quotes Sally Ashford on considerations around power of attorney

    Sally Ashford

    In the Press

Back to top