UK: Court Reforms And Arbitration: Courting Disaster

Last Updated: 20 October 2014
Article by Owain Davies

Three recent cases reveal the difficulties practitioners face in understanding how the law will be applied by the courts. In addition to these difficulties, the courts' new procedural rules, introduced by Lord Justice Jackson and which came into effect in April 2013, have led to practitioners extolling the virtues of alternative means of dispute resolution.

Game

Jervis v Pillar Denton Ltd [2014] EWCA Civ 180; [2014] EGILR 25 (Game) concerned tenants in administration and when rent should be payable as an expense of the administration. Game overturned the earlier High Court decisions in Goldacre (Offices) Ltd v Nortel Networks UK Ltd [2009] EWHC 3389 (Ch); [2010] 1 EGLR 25, Leisure Norwich (II) Ltd v Luminar Lava Ignite Ltd (in administration) [2012] EWHC 951 (Ch), and the first instance decision in Game (where the court followed Goldacre and Luminar, but granted permission to appeal).

Prior to Goldacre, landlords and administrators invariably agreed that if a tenant fell into administration, but continued to use the landlord's premises, the administrators would continue to pay rent at a daily rate. While this was not without its pitfalls, it provided a reasonable degree of certainty to the parties involved.

However, Goldacre held that this rent payment convention had no legal effect. If a tenant fell into administration, and continued to use leased premises, the administrators would be liable to pay rent in full on the day on which it fell due – if the premises were being used on a quarter day, the administrators had to pay the entire quarter's rent as an expense (irrespective of whether or not the tenant vacated the premises during the quarter). This principle was affirmed and extended by Luminar, which determined rent was not payable as an administration expense if it fell due on a date before the tenant entered into administration.

The practical consequences of the rulings were wholly unsatisfactory:

  • administrators were tactically appointed very shortly after a quarter day to avoid liability to pay rents as an administration expense;
  • administrators then sought to minimise periods of use to avoid the liability to pay a full quarter's rent on the next quarter day;
  • fire sales of companies' assets frequently occurred before quarter days – a quick sale of assets at an undervalue was more cost-effective than incurring a rental liability by remaining in occupation; and
  • companies ceased to trade prematurely whereas they may have continued to trade for a greater period of time under the old rent payment convention.

The consequences flew in the face of the objectives of an administration – to rescue the company or achieve the best results for the company's creditors and to realise the company's assets.

Landlords were disadvantaged as they faced the possibility of recovering no rents as an expense if the administrators' period of occupation did not coincide with a rent payment date, which administrators frequently sought to ensure was the case.

The rulings also hampered sensible commercial dealings between landlords and administrators and came at a time of significant economic turmoil – affecting the administrations of thousands of companies and their employees.

Fortunately, Game has now reversed these earlier decisions and given modern authority to the convention that rent can, and should, be payable on a "day-to-day basis" as an administration expense for the period that the administrator retains possession of the premises.

Friends Life

Siemens Hearing Instruments Ltd v Friends Life [2014] EWCA Civ 382; [2014] EGILR 29 concerned the validly of a tenant's break notice. The landlord argued that the break notice served was invalid as specified wording, which the lease's break clause stated "must be expressed" in the notice, was omitted.

There was very clear authority to support the landlord's case – as Lord Hoffmann put in it Mannai Investment Co Ltd v Eagle Star Assurance [1997] UKHL 19; [1997] 1 EGLR 57, if a clause requires an option notice to be given on pink paper it is not validly exercised by giving it on blue paper no matter how clear the intention to exercise the option may be.

However, the High Court sided with the tenant, determining that a break clause's use of the word "must" was not of itself decisive and that non-fulfilment of the conditions attached to a break notice may not be fatal. The court determined this break notice was valid, having regard to the fact that the wording which the lease provided "must be expressed" in the break notice was of no legal effect. While the decision appeared to herald a less strict approach to the exercise of break options, many practitioners were sceptical. Their scepticism was well founded.

The Court of Appeal overruled the decision and, in doing so, provided a stark reminder of the potential pitfalls when exercising a break right. The court determined that the notice was invalid as the wording that had to "be expressed" in the notice was omitted, even though (i) the notice clearly intended to terminate the lease in accordance with the break clause and (ii) the wording that had to "be expressed" in the notice was of no legal effect.

The Court of Appeal's reasoning was based on the nature of options (of which break clauses are a type). An option is an "if" contract. If you do it, it can be exercised. If you don't, it won't. The tenant in Friends Life failed to exercise the option by omitting the specified wording, and the lease continued with full force and effect after the break date.

Marks & Spencer

The court has addressed the perils of conditional break clauses on many occasions. Following case law, a well-advised tenant exercising a break option will ensure that all rents are paid in full up to and including the break date, as break clauses invariably provide that rent must be paid in full to effect the break.

Following recent authorities (see PCE Investors Ltd v Cancer Research UK [2012] EWHC 884 (Ch); [2012] PLSCS 84 and Canonical UK Ltd v TST Millbank LLC [2012] EWHC 3710 (Ch); [2013] 02 EGLR 193), it was widely considered that a tenant could not seek a repayment of the apportionment of rent paid for the period following the break date (unless the lease terms provided for the contrary).Marks & Spencer plc v BNP Paribas Securities Services Trust Company (Jersey) Ltd [2014] EWCA Civ 603; [2014] PLSCS 150 dealt with this issue. The High Court determined that the tenant was entitled to a repayment of rents paid in respect of the period after the break date, concluding that a repayment provision should be implied into the lease. However, the Court of Appeal overturned the decision, concluding that: (i) if the parties intended rent to be apportioned following the break they could easily have expressly provided for this in the lease; and (ii) the test for an implied repayment term was not met in this case (albeit the door still remains open for tenants to argue for an implied repayment provision should the test be capable of being met).

Jackson reforms

The three cases above were all determined at a time when Lord Justice Jackson's court reforms were being implemented. Lord Justice Jackson promised the reforms would boost efficiency and reduce litigation costs. Many commentators consider the reforms, in many respects, fail to achieve these objectives and lack commerciality.

One of the most time-consuming and costly aspects of the reforms is the new cost budgeting exercise – a requirement for parties to litigation to set, share and agree costs budgets with each other at the very outset of court proceedings. In almost all cases, this has resulted in upfront costs being incurred dealing solely with the issue of costs.

The Ministry of Justice's Judicial and court statistics indicate that, in 2010, more than 1,600,000 civil (non-family) claims were started in the County Court. The overwhelming majority of these were settled or withdrawn – with the consequence that liability for costs was invariably agreed between the parties, rather than determined by the court.

High Court proceedings reflected a very similar trend. In the High Court there is a far greater prospect of the court ordering that costs should be the subject of a detailed assessment. If such an order is made, almost always the parties agree liability for costs between themselves rather than embark on the highly costly and disproportionate exercise of a detailed assessment of costs.

Therefore, prior to the Jackson reforms, the court did not determine litigation costs in almost all disputes. This may be one of the reasons why there has been criticism of the court's lack of consistency in dealing with costs management issues following the implementation of the reforms.

Clearly all practitioners should advise their clients on costs and most were preparing costs, compliant detailed budgets and estimates before the introduction of the reforms. However, parties will now incur upfront costs determining litigation costs, notwithstanding that the overwhelmingly majority of disputes will settle or be withdrawn before the court falls to consider the substantive issues in dispute, let alone liability for costs.

On this basis alone, it is highly questionable whether the Jackson reforms will reduce litigation costs. That is before one considers the costs that have been and will be incurred in inevitable satellite litigation arising from the reforms.

Certainty and proportionality

Property investment has played a pivotal part in the UK's economic recovery, and a key selling point to all investors is the reasonable degree of certainty the UK property market provides. Part of this certainty stems from the UK's reputation for dispute resolution which is founded on inherent consistencies in the English legal system. The court's oscillating approach reflected by the above cases does not extoll our talents for consistency and certainty.

Furthermore, and principally because of the Jackson reforms, an ever-increasing number of practitioners consider the court to be the place of last resort to satisfactorily determine a dispute. Standard arbitration clauses in new leases, and a growth in arbitration as an alternative means for resolving property disputes, appear inevitable.

A movement away from court determination for lack of certainty and proportionality is likely to impede on the government's desire for the civil courts to become self-funding, and it will do very little for the international reputation of our legal system, but it should come as welcome news to arbitrators in the property sector.

Article first appeared in Estates Gazette, August 2014

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
 
In association with
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
 
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of www.mondaq.com

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about Mondaq.com’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.

Disclaimer

Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.

Registration

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to unsubscribe@mondaq.com with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.

Cookies

A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.

Links

This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.

Mail-A-Friend

If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.

Security

This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to webmaster@mondaq.com.

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to EditorialAdvisor@mondaq.com.

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at enquiries@mondaq.com.

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at problems@mondaq.com and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.