QLD Is Commercial Lease Now Considered Invalid?

[andrew timms]

HI,

I have a commercial lease agreement for a business unit. This has special conditions that have not been met. Does this mean the contract is not valid? As I had no access to the unit before, the rental the unit was not painted,

14 Special Condition

a.The Lessee must paint the unit AS AGREED in a colour and texture as agreed by the Lessor or Agent.

b. if you do not paint prior to the commemcement of the lease, then the lease will be automatically null and void.

Does this mean the contract is null and void and effectively I am renting without a contract?

Thanks in advance for any help.

 

[Rob Legat - SBPL]

Did you agree on a "colour and texture"? Was there anything said by the landlord/agent about painting, or the fact that it hadn't been done?

It's a poorly conceived clause, and it can depend on what the rest of the lease says (which we can't see). However, the clause is clearly for the benefit of the landlord. If they've chosen to affirm the lease by allowing you access and accepting rent, then you can be pretty safe in saying they're not going to take action on the 'breach'.

 

[andrew timms]

Thanks for the answer Rob.

There was no agreement on texture or colour. And I couldn’t do it because I actually didn’t get access until after the lease started.

I’m not worried about being kicked out, to be honest. I’d like to end the lease early if possible. I’m hoping I can use this to move out early as business is not too good.

Also I noticed they made a mistake on the dates. The contracts ends a week before it started, they put 2017 not 2018 as the end date.

Do you think this is enough to ask them to simply cancel the contract and let me leave with a month's notice? Would I be able to claim it’s invalid in court if needed?

 

[Rob Legat - SBPL]

No. And, doubtful. Just as they didn't treat it as terminated, neither did you.

 

[andrew timms]

Ok thanks, I only realised this week when I had my father look though it for me.

 

[Clancy]

That special condition is absurd. How can you stipulate a condition in a lease that must take place before the lease is in effect? It's a requirement to obey a contract that does not exist yet?

 

[andrew timms]

I know Clancy. When I told people I know they said it was ridiculous and the lease must be invalid. But I guess there are other things lawyers take into account. I thought a contract was set in stone and you had to abide by it, so my understanding as a layman would be if it says that then the contract is null and void, plain and simple.

 

[Clancy]

I know Clancy, when I told people I know they said it was ridiculous and the lease must be invalid. But I guess there are other things lawyers take into account. I thought a contract was set in stone and you had to abide by it, so my understanding as a layman would be if it says that then the contract is null and void, plain and simple.

Well, no, I mean it is an absurd clause, but the clause is a protection for the landlord and a breach of the clause is a disadvantage only to the landlord, therefore actionable only by the landlord. If the landlord chose not to action it, then you're stuck with the lease.

 

[Rob Legat - SBPL]

Contract is not the sacred animal that it once was. Poorly drafted clauses like this one is an example of why it is a complicated area of law.