Reinstatement And The Requirement For Written Notice – Landlord 'Barking Up The Right Tree' (Get It?)

Introduction

The case of L. Batley Pet Products Ltd v North Lanarkshire Council [2014] UKSC 27 provides useful guidance on the responsibilities of parties involved in the letting of commercial properties.

The Facts

L. Batley Pet Products (the 'Appellant') was the mid-landlord of two commercial premises in Cumbernauld, with North Lanarkshire Council (the 'Respondent') as the sub-tenant. On the expiry of the sub-lease, a dispute arose between the parties as to whether or not the Respondent had to remove alterations made to the properties when it was requested to do so, orally, by the Appellant's surveyor. The Appellant did not put the request in writing by way of a schedule of dilapidations, or by any other means.

The Issues

The UK Supreme Court noted that the case raised two questions of contractual construction in connection with documents relating to the letting of commercial premises:

If the authority to make alterations to the premises was given by Minute of Agreement, did this oblige the Appellant to provide the Respondent with a written request to remove the alterations made? Did the repairing obligation under the Head Lease, which was applied to the sub-lease, oblige the Appellant to provide the Respondent with written notification that it was required to make repairs before the sub-lease expired? The Decision

An Extra Division of the Inner House of the Court of Session had previously dismissed the appeal and held that a commercial landlord had to provide written notification to a tenant that it was required to reinstate the property. However, the UK Supreme Court disagreed and allowed the Appellant's appeal and a Proof before Answer.

The court noted that a disputed clause in the Minute of Agreement, which...