Dilapidations claims & Part 36 offers

admin Legal updates

Dilapidations claims & Part 36 offers:

A miss is as good as a mile (source Taylor Wessing real estate disputes team 0207 300 4199)
Hammersmatch Properties (Welwyn) Limited v (1) Saint-Gobain Ceramics and Plastics Limited (2) Saint-Gobain Abrasives Inc [2013] EWHC 2227 (TCC)

The Court had been asked to make a costs order following its earlier decision on a terminal dilapidations claim. The decision is a very useful reminder of how Part 36 will be applied by the Courts, and how serious the consequences can be.
In this case, the defendant tenant had made a Part 36 offer to settle, which was not accepted by the landlord. At trial, the landlord was awarded damages that were only slightly higher than the tenant's offer.
The tenant argued that the normal rule, that the winning party can recover its costs, should not apply because its offer was such a near miss. It argued that the Court should take account of its Part 36 offer in reducing the amount of the landlord's costs.
The Court did not accept the argument. It held that the Part 36 offer, although very near, was still not sufficient. The mere fact of a near miss was not sufficient to affect the costs order.

Written By


This is just test data. This is just test data. This is just test data. This is just test data. This is just test data. This is just test data. This is just test data. This is just test data.

You May Also Like..

Advance rental payment and break clauses

Legal experts Taylor Wessing  report on a important commercial real estate landmark ruling on the advance payment of rent pursuant to a break clause.

M&S not entitled to cashback on checkout – Marks and Spencer v BNP Paribas


Crucial Supreme Court ruling confirms landlords can keep rent paid in advance where tenants break midway through a rental period.

After years of uncertainty, the Supreme Court… read the rest of “Advance rental payment and break clauses”

Proving intention to redevelop

The Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 provides protection for both landlords and tenants when dealing with lease renewal rights. However, AT WHAT POINT does a landlord of commercial property need to prove his intention to redevelop in order to successfully oppose the renewal of a '54 Act protected lease? Legal experts Taylor Wessing outline a recent case which seeks to deal with this point;

Hough v Greathall Ltd [2015] EWCA Civ 23… read the rest of “Proving intention to redevelop”

Commercial lease break – pre-emptive strike!

Real Estate legal experts Taylor Wessing report on Royal Mail's request for guidance on a forthcoming lease break and its importance;-

In light of the recent Court decisions on break clauses that have gone against tenants (please see TW's article on the M&S break litigation),  another FTSE 100 tenant, Royal Mail, has now decided to take a pre-emptive strike (Royal Mail Group Ltd v Airport Industrial GP Ltd and another). In… read the rest of “Commercial lease break - pre-emptive strike!”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *