Judgment for commercial rent arrears in case involving COVID-19 issues obtained by landlord

Judgment for commercial rent arrears in case involving COVID-19 issues obtained by landlord

The first reported judgment has now been handed down in respect of a landlord’s claim for commercial rent arrears concerning issues raised in a tenant’s defence as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, in the case Commerz Real Investmentgesellschaft mbh v TFS Stores Limited [2021] EWHC 863 (Ch).

The landlord sued for non-payment of rent and service charge accruing during the period of lockdown in respect of its premises at Westfield Shopping Centre in London. 

The Defendants defence was threefold – 

First that the claim was issued prematurely and contrary to the Code of Practice for Commercial Property Relationships During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Second that the claim was a means of circumventing the measures put in place by the government to protect commercial tenants and prevent landlords from using certain remedies available to it such as forfeiture and winding up petitions, 

and 

Thirdly that the landlord was in breach of its insuring covenant as it should have insured against loss of rent as a result of a forced closure and/or denial of access due to notifiable disease and/or government action (and the rent cesser clause would be triggered as a result of damage caused by an insured risk).

The landlord brought an application for summary judgment and was successful. 

In respect of the first point, the court said the landlord was not in breach of the Code of Practice in issuing its claim as the code does not suspend or vary the parties’ obligations under the lease. The Code itself makes clear that it “is a voluntary code and does not change the underlying legal relationship or lease contracts between landlord and tenant and any guarantor”.

In respect of the second point, the issuing of a debt claim was not a “loophole” to circumvent the measures brought in by the government to protect tenants, as the government had not altered the ability of a landlord to bring a claim for unpaid rent and service charge.

In relation to the third point regarding insurance, the landlord was not required to insure against a notifiable disease or government action under the terms of the lease. They were not defined as Insured Risks and the landlord was not obliged to insure against any other risks unless it chooses to do so. Further, the landlord was not obliged to insure against the tenant’s loss of business. A policy would cover any loss of business caused to the landlord however, The tenant should take out its own insurance policy to protect against its losses. Any claim by the landlord under its policy would therefore be rejected by its insurer on the grounds that the landlord had not suffered a loss to its business. There was no justification for an argument that the landlord must look first to its insurance policy where the rent remained due under the terms of the lease.

In any event, the rent cesser clause is not triggered because there has been no physical damage to the property. The rent cesser clause only applied where there had been damage to the property caused by an insured risk. The Defendant also sought to imply a rent cesser clause where premises were incapable of being kept open contrary to a “keep open” clause in the lease. The judge helpfully commented, “The lease apportions risk between the parties and the rent cesser provisions apply exceptionally in the limited circumstances they expressly contemplate, and no further.

Many landlords are seeing tenants raising the Code of Practice as a reason not to pay rent.  This judgment makes it clear that the Code of Practice does not alter the obligations in the lease of a tenant to pay rent. The judgment deals with issues raised by tenants regarding the terms of the insurance and while a landlord must insure for the defined Insured Risks, there is no obligation for it to insure for any other risk. Further, the comments regarding rent cesser clauses confirms that the rent cesser provisions should not apply to wider circumstances than it states on the face of it.

The case was determined at summary judgment rather than at trial and so there is scope for arguments to be developed at a full trial in other cases, but there is now some judicial commentary on how cases involving COVID-19 defences may be considered by the courts.

The moratorium on forfeitures is due to end on 30 June 2021, and in light of this judgment, landlords may now see an increased willingness for tenants to pay their rent arrears or at least to reach agreement on the rents.

How Athena Debt Recovery Can Help

  • Your debt is treated as if it were money owed to us, and we collect it as quickly as possible
  • We can call on and you can draw on the additional expertise of our Commercial Litigation and Insolvency teams
  • We are approachable, commercial and always happy to discuss individual matters
  • You can rely on our use of the latest technology to ensure an efficient and reliable service
  • We can increase your recoveries by working smarter

The recovery of debts is extremely important to avoid financial pressure on your business. 

We offer a range of services to help you do this and a highly skilled team of commercial debt recovery lawyers who specialise in Pre-Action Collection, Court Proceedings, Enforcement of Judgments, Bankruptcy and Winding Up and Foreign Debt Collection.

We offer a competitive quality debt recovery service for general debt matters. 

We also provide a bespoke service for difficult debts or where insolvency proceedings are appropriate. 

We can undertake bulk recoveries or debt portfolios.

About the author

Iain Bould

Senior litigation executive and manager

Iain is a senior litigation executive and manager of Athena Debt Recovery which is part of the firm’s commercial litigation department supervised by our head of commercial litigation partner Stephen Boyd.

Iain has over 28 years experience in Commercial Debt Recovery having worked in both Private Practice and Industry and has extensive experience working across all industry sectors and has a particular expertise in working with Insolvency Practitioners in advising and recovering outstanding insolvent company ledgers.

Iain brings a pragmatic and commercial approach to recovering debts.

Contact us for a free consultation

If you need any advice or further information regarding this article, please contact us.  

We offer a free initial consultation and if clients have a viable claim, we offer a variety of retainer options including no win – no fee arrangements.  

Every case or potential case will be assessed, on its own merits.

If you have found this article interesting and would like to learn more about how Athena Law can help you please feel free to contact the writer, Iain Bould, at iain.bould@athenadr.co.uk or via the contact page on the website.

Share this post

Share on facebook
Share on google
Share on twitter
Share on linkedin
Share on pinterest
Share on print
Share on email
Scroll to Top