Ambiguous lease

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • josepha333
    replied
    Thank you both for the replies.

    It appears to remain unclear however and I presume it would rely on further covenants within the lease if it did go to the FTT for a ruling.

    Leave a comment:


  • AndrewDod
    replied
    To get back to your original question -- Although I don't think it is ambiguous (it is a slight shambles which is not the same thing) - if you do think it ambiguous you can take it to FTT for a ruling. Where things are genuinely ambiguous the general rule is that they are interpreted in favour of the lessee (not the freeholder or other lessees).

    Leave a comment:


  • AndrewDod
    replied
    Originally posted by leaseholder64 View Post
    I would suggest that "without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing" means that the private residence condition overrides all that follows. I don't see that serviced accommodation is restricted to hotel like arrangements.
    I respectfully disagree. "without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing" bars you from using the examples that follow to limit and reinterpret the application of the first part (not the converse). However the specific examples stand on their own as examples of things you can do.

    "No animals shall be allowed on the bus, and, without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing, a guide dog is allowed."

    Means that you can take a guide dog, but means that you cannot use the specific instance to inform the meaning of the word "animal".

    It does not mean that you cannot take a guide dog.

    and the "save that" makes the dissociation even clearer (albeit inconsistent)

    "No animals shall be allowed on the bus, and, without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing, pigs are not allowed, save that a guide dog is allowed."

    Leave a comment:


  • leaseholder64
    replied
    I would suggest that "without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing" means that the private residence condition overrides all that follows. I don't see that serviced accommodation is restricted to hotel like arrangements.

    Leave a comment:


  • AndrewDod
    replied
    I don't see this as ambiguous. It presents an alternative to a "private residence". The words "save that" pretty much abolish the rest of the paragraph in terms of that alternative.

    There is the matter of definitions of terms of course, but AirBnB (if that is what you are worried about) would seem to be a prime example of "serviced accommodation".

    Odd. But not ambiguous. The fact that "serviced accommodation" does not fit well with the first half seems to me not to matter give the "save that".

    A bit like saying "You cannot have pets save that you can have a rottweiler"

    Leave a comment:


  • josepha333
    replied
    Originally posted by AndrewDod View Post
    If you gave us a clue someone could try answer.
    Hi,

    Thank you AndrewDod.

    Covenant enforceable by the Lessor, Management Company and Lessees of other apartments states;

    To use the property as a whole as a private residence used by the occupiers from time to time of the property or their visitors and (without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing) not to carry on or allow to be carried on any trade business or profession in or from the property and not to use or allow to be used the property for boarding or lodging save that the property may be used for serviced accommodation providing all necessary planning permissions are obtained.

    Given the findings of Nemcova can't see how to use '........as a private residence' sits comfortably along side 'save that the property may be used for serviced accommodation.....'

    Leave a comment:


  • AndrewDod
    replied
    If you gave us a clue someone could try answer.

    What sort of lease, what exactly is ambiguous, who is the person seeking "options"? Does every party to the lease want the ambiguity to be clarified? And so on....

    Pretty much every contract on earth is ambiguous - if a lease says "though shalt not beat mats" - there is the question of the definition of a "mat", the definition of "beat", who is doing the beating....

    Leave a comment:


  • josepha333
    started a topic Ambiguous lease

    Ambiguous lease

    Hi all,

    What are the options available if the lease is ambiguous in certain areas?

    Thanks in advance for any information or guidance provided.

Latest Activity

Collapse

Working...
X