Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Exclusions from operating expenses are frequently the subject of much wrangling between landlords and tenants in lease negotiations. Many sophisticated parties will deal with such exclusions in the Letter of Intent, a method which allows the business people to focus on the issue early, rather than having the lawyers argue about it during the lease negotiation.
One way for tenants with leverage to protect themselves against significant increases in operating expenses (and also to avoid some of the hassle of negotiating exclusions) is to agree upon an annual cap on tenant's liability for increases in operating expenses. Landlords may be willing to entertain such a concept, but generally will insist that any cap apply only to items that are not “controllable.” Letters of Intent will sometimes include a cap on “non-controllable costs” and leave the definition of “controllable” up to the negotiating lawyers. Not surprisingly, lawyers are quite likely to disagree on this point. It may be prudent for the parties to address the issue directly, rather than paying for their respective counsel to argue. At a minimum, controllable costs should expressly exclude real estate taxes, insurance, seasonal maintenance such as snow removal, sanding, etc., and utility costs. Landlords may also attempt to exclude wages and benefits pursuant to collective bargaining agreements, non-insured casualties, and legal compliance, but savvy tenants (particularly those with leverage) will not necessarily accept such exclusions to an expense cap. As in any other lease negotiation, the more attention given to the issue by the parties when the deal is struck, the less likelihood for misunderstanding when the lease is negotiated and executed.
Exclusions from operating expenses are frequently the subject of much wrangling between landlords and tenants in lease negotiations. Many sophisticated parties will deal with such exclusions in the Letter of Intent, a method which allows the business people to focus on the issue early, rather than having the lawyers argue about it during the lease negotiation.
One way for tenants with leverage to protect themselves against significant increases in operating expenses (and also to avoid some of the hassle of negotiating exclusions) is to agree upon an annual cap on tenant's liability for increases in operating expenses. Landlords may be willing to entertain such a concept, but generally will insist that any cap apply only to items that are not “controllable.” Letters of Intent will sometimes include a cap on “non-controllable costs” and leave the definition of “controllable” up to the negotiating lawyers. Not surprisingly, lawyers are quite likely to disagree on this point. It may be prudent for the parties to address the issue directly, rather than paying for their respective counsel to argue. At a minimum, controllable costs should expressly exclude real estate taxes, insurance, seasonal maintenance such as snow removal, sanding, etc., and utility costs. Landlords may also attempt to exclude wages and benefits pursuant to collective bargaining agreements, non-insured casualties, and legal compliance, but savvy tenants (particularly those with leverage) will not necessarily accept such exclusions to an expense cap. As in any other lease negotiation, the more attention given to the issue by the parties when the deal is struck, the less likelihood for misunderstanding when the lease is negotiated and executed.
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
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
Active reading comprises many daily tasks lawyers engage in, including highlighting, annotating, note taking, comparing and searching texts. It demands more than flipping or turning pages.
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.