Commercial Contract Law

[imnoexpert]

Hi all,

I'm new here, not sure if anyone can help.

I have a commercial lease with a break clause, requiring 12 months notice. I sent notice of termination before the required day by first class post, giving 12 months notice. The landlord has admitted receiving my intention to cancel, but says that it was not served correctly as the contract required Special Delivery service only.

Surely them admitting receipt is sufficient for service? Can anyone advise?

They are going to take me to court over this so I want to get it right, but can't afford fancy lawyers like they are using! I can't afford another 12 months expensive rent, my business will go under!

Thanks!

[leclerc]

Re: Commercial Contract Law

Hi all,

I'm new here, not sure if anyone can help.

I have a commercial lease with a break clause, requiring 12 months notice. I sent notice of termination before the required day by first class post, giving 12 months notice. The landlord has admitted receiving my intention to cancel, but says that it was not served correctly as the contract required Special Delivery service only.

Surely them admitting receipt is sufficient for service? Can anyone advise?

They are going to take me to court over this so I want to get it right, but can't afford fancy lawyers like they are using! I can't afford another 12 months expensive rent, my business will go under!

Thanks!

That sounds utterly ridiculous. Have they taken you to court? Are they looking to get you evicted? Have the 12 months elapsed?

[teaboy2]

Re: Commercial Contract Law

I agree, its ridiculous, plus a court of law would make such a term void in regards to the special delivery part. The law itself makes clear as to what is deemed as acceptable service, and would simply fall back on that and proof of postage. But by admitting they received notice of termination, they have in fact admitted to being served the notice.

A simple reminder to them highlighting what i said above, would be enough i would expect along with a threat to take legal action for breach of contract if they do not honor your notice of termination. And that it would be for them to proof that anything but special delivery is not acceptable service via post, when there is no legal requirements in law specific to the type of contract in question (as far as am aware) that would make only special delivery acceptable service.

[imnoexpert]

Re: Commercial Contract Law

Thanks, that's helpful.

They haven't taken me to Court yet but are threatening legal action as I haven't paid the rent since the break date (as I believe it was fully executed). They already have solicitors writing to me threatening legal action and indemnity costs!

The lawyers are a big law firm in london and their costs would be crazy so I've got a horrible feeling they will try and take me for every penny I've got!

Do you know if there's any law or case that I could quote to sound like I know what I'm talking about?

Also, we've already moved out! It was required by the termination clause so we haven't even been using it for months!

Thanks in advance!

[leclerc]

Re: Commercial Contract Law

When did the landlord acknowledge receipt of the letter? This may be important, see case law below: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2009/6.html

A key point in the above is that if he acknowledges it prior to the break date then it can be classed as validly served. If not then unfortunately you need to negotiate settlement.

[labman]

Re: Commercial Contract Law

I am playing Devil's Advocate here intentionally, so please don't take against this post - I too think it's totay ridiculous, and having admitted receipt I think they'd have a tough time in court.

However, the fact remains that Special Delivery is the ONLY way of guaranteeing a letter is going to be delivered. 1st, 2nd class and recorded delivery are not guaranteed to be deivered ever.

This is probably WHY they put that clause in, but having admitted receipt, that clause is really irrelevant.

[leclerc]

Re: Commercial Contract Law

I am playing Devil's Advocate here intentionally, so please don't take against this post - I too think it's totay ridiculous, and having admitted receipt I think they'd have a tough time in court.

However, the fact remains that Special Delivery is the ONLY way of guaranteeing a letter is going to be delivered. 1st, 2nd class and recorded delivery are not guaranteed to be deivered ever.

This is probably WHY they put that clause in, but having admitted receipt, that clause is really irrelevant.

Labman, have you read the case law quoted by me? The issue of serving is very relevant UNLESS the letter was acknowledged prior to the cut off date. The case law is one where the company posted it through the wrong address and also faxed it correctly prior to the date but this was not acknowledged until after the cut off date which is where they failed in their case. On the face of it, the clause sounds nonsense but acknowledgement of receipt is the key to whether there is any cause of action.

[labman]

Re: Commercial Contract Law

Thanks Leclerc - in that case, when coupled with my post, it would explain quite clearly why the Special Delivery was mentioned.