Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
In the Spotlight: Crafting Carve-Outs to Tenant's Obligation to Pay Operating Expenses
Much ink, thought, and aggravation have gone into crafting carve-outs to a tenant's obligation to pay its proportionate share of operating expenses. Depending on the relative leverage of the parties in the deal, the tenant may get significant concessions from the landlord, including carve-outs for capital items and other potentially costly expenditures.
Most tenants and/or their lawyers have lengthy lists of favorite carve-out items. Some may be quirky, such as art and holiday decorations; some are basic, such as expenses incurred in connection with the lease-up of rentable space. Landlords of course have their “must have” inclusions. The net result of the differences in opinion can be a lengthy and particularly tedious negotiation.
One of the most expedient ways of cutting through the thicket of what gets excluded from operating expenses is to agree upon an annual cap on increases. While generally available only to significant tenants, a typical lease provision would provide that the tenant's proportionate share of the operating expenses for any lease year will not exceed 105% of the expenses for the preceding year. Landlords must be careful when agreeing to any such cap to carve out specifically variable expenses over which they have no control. The two most significant carve-outs would be winter maintenance and insurance expenses. Other popular carve-outs include labor and fuel expenses. These variable carve-outs should also apply in any instance where a tenant has negotiated a cap on the operating expenses for the first lease year.
William Crowe
Much ink, thought, and aggravation have gone into crafting carve-outs to a tenant's obligation to pay its proportionate share of operating expenses. Depending on the relative leverage of the parties in the deal, the tenant may get significant concessions from the landlord, including carve-outs for capital items and other potentially costly expenditures.
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.
Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?