A Massachusetts court recently decided a case involving a commercial lease agreement dispute, which determined that a landlord’s alleged breach does not justify the tenant’s decision to stop paying rent. In this case, the landlord sued its tenant arguing the tenant had no right to terminate its lease or withhold rent. The court agreed with the landlord given language in the lease where the tenant had agreed that it would have no rights to terminate the lease based on a such a breach by the landlord. In reaching its decision, the court also rejected the tenant’s argument that it had been constructively evicted from the premises, noting that the tenant had voluntarily relinquished its right to make that argument.

Alex Tsianatelis, who has negotiated numerous complex, multi-million-dollar commercial leases, provided Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly with his insights about the case. Alex said that when he represents commercial tenants, he pushes to remove language where the tenant must abide by the lease and continue to pay rent even in the face of a landlord’s breach.

“Very seldomly do we get it out wholesale,” he said. “What you can get sometimes is that tenants will have the right to terminate only for very specific reasons.”

Alex said he could understand why the tenant argued constructive eviction in this case but added that “… the court’s logic makes sense in summarizing that constructive eviction is more about when a space becomes unusable, rather than when a space could be usable albeit in a way that the tenant doesn’t prefer”.

Continue reading “Landlord’s alleged breach doesn’t justify end of rent payments” on the Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly website (subscription required).