Jetts is a global 24/7 fitness franchise, offering high-quality, accessible gyms and continuing to grow its UK footprint. The Harlesden acquisition marks the eighth Jetts site instruction our Commercial Property team has successfully completed, and we are proud to continue supporting the business as it expands.

Following completion of the transaction, franchise owner Karman Singh shared this feedback with our team:

“I wanted to take a moment to thank you for all your support on the Harlesden transaction… it played a real part in helping us get this site launched, and it’s already turning into a fantastic gym… Look forward to catching up with you for future transactions!”

We’re grateful to Karman for his kind words. Building long-term relationships with our clients and supporting them as they grow is an important part of what we do, and we’re pleased to have played a role in the successful launch of the Harlesden gym.

Read more about the opening here.

If you’re expanding your business, acquiring new premises or negotiating commercial leases, our Commercial Property team provides clear, commercially focused legal advice to businesses, investors, landlords and occupiers across the UK.

Find out more about our Commercial Property team here.

Devolution moves to the heart of government

Perhaps the defining feature of Burnham’s approach is his belief that economic growth is best driven locally rather than directed exclusively from Westminster. That philosophy is already being reflected in the way government is operating. Burnham has begun working from the newly established “No.10 North”, reinforcing his commitment to regional decision-making and signalling that devolution is intended to sit at the heart of government rather than remain simply a policy objective. For the property industry, greater devolution could mean planning decisions that better reflect local priorities, infrastructure delivered more strategically and increased certainty over long-term regional investment. For developers and investors, predictable decision-making is often just as valuable as speed.

 

Planning reform alone will not unlock development

Planning reform has featured prominently in discussions about the Government’s agenda, but legislation alone is unlikely to solve longstanding challenges. A recurring theme is the need for better resourced planning departments, greater technical expertise and more consistent decision-making across local authorities. Delays are frequently caused as much by limited capacity as by planning policy itself. If reform is accompanied by investment in planning resources, it could significantly improve confidence across the development space.

 

Housing with infrastructure, not housing alone

Housing remains central to the Government’s growth agenda, but the focus appears broader than simply increasing housing numbers. The emphasis is on creating sustainable communities where homes are delivered alongside transport, employment opportunities and public services. Proposals for new towns, brownfield regeneration and affordable housing all point towards a more integrated approach to development. This has implications well beyond the residential market. New communities create demand for offices, retail, healthcare, education, logistics and leisure space, presenting opportunities across the commercial property industry.

 

Regional investment remains a priority

Burnham has consistently argued that regional cities require greater control over investment decisions if they are to compete internationally. If additional powers are devolved, cities such as Manchester, Birmingham, Leeds and Liverpool could become increasingly attractive destinations for institutional investment, regeneration and infrastructure projects. For investors, the opportunity may lie not only in individual developments but also in identifying locations where long-term public investment is likely to unlock private capital.

 

Business rates reform could influence the commercial market

One of the Government’s earliest announcements has been a commitment to reduce business rates for pubs, reflecting Burnham’s wider ambition to support high streets and the hospitality sector. For many operators, lower occupational costs will be welcome. More importantly for the wider property market, the announcement may provide an early indication of the Government’s willingness to use business rates as a tool to encourage economic growth. Whether this leads to broader reform remains to be seen, but landlords, investors and occupiers will be watching closely. Changes to occupational costs inevitably influence tenant demand, rental values and investment decisions across the commercial property market.

 

Industrial growth and specialist space

Property policy is increasingly being viewed through the lens of economic growth. Burnham has highlighted manufacturing, defence, advanced engineering and domestic supply chains as sectors capable of driving investment and employment. If those priorities translate into government policy, demand for industrial and logistics space may continue to strengthen, particularly around established manufacturing centres and key transport corridors. The continued expansion of data centres, life sciences and clean technology is also likely to reinforce demand for specialist commercial property.

 

Heritage, retrofit and regeneration

The Government has also indicated that heritage protection and housing delivery need not be competing objectives. Greater emphasis is being placed on retrofit, adaptive reuse and the conversion of underused buildings. For developers, this could unlock opportunities that may previously have been viewed as too complex, while also supporting wider sustainability objectives. Delivering that ambition, however, is likely to depend on consistent planning decisions and an appropriate policy framework.

 

What should property professionals be watching?

Over the coming months, businesses should monitor:

• planning reforms and changes to decision-making powers;
• the national housing strategy, including proposals for new towns and regeneration;
• further business rates reforms affecting occupational costs;
• regional infrastructure and funding announcements;
• opportunities arising from greater devolution; and
• measures supporting retrofit and the reuse of existing buildings.

 

Looking ahead

Many of the Burnham Government’s proposals are still evolving, but the first weeks of the new administration have already provided clear indications of its priorities, from targeted business rates relief for pubs to the establishment of “No.10 North” as a symbol of its commitment to regional growth. This is not simply a housing or planning agenda. It is an economic strategy in which property is expected to play a central role in delivering growth. For developers, investors, landlords and occupiers, understanding that broader direction of travel will be just as important as following individual policy announcements. Those who engage early with the Government’s evolving priorities may be best placed to identify opportunities as the UK’s property landscape continues to evolve.

To find out more, our Commercial Property team advises developers, investors, landlords and occupiers on acquisitions, development, leasing, investment and regeneration projects across England.

 

Perhaps counter-intuitively, a covenant to keep in good repair requires a tenant to make good any disrepair which already exists at the start of the lease. For this reason, it is important for tenants to inspect potential new premises and ascertain its existing level of repair and condition prior to taking on an FRI lease.

A requirement to keep in “good repair and condition” is slightly more onerous than a covenant to keep “in repair”, as the former can require works to be carried out even if there is no disrepair, unlike the latter.

 

Ways to limit the repairing obligations

The tenant’s repair obligation will extend to the extent of their demise. For this reason, modern leases usually contain a fair amount of detail about what exactly is included within the demise, and what falls outside this. Tenants should therefore check carefully exactly what is included within their demise, as they will not want to be solely responsible for any areas which are in practice used by several of the building’s occupiers.

Where a new lease is being entered into, and the proposed demise is in disrepair, the tenant can seek to limit the repair clause by means of a Schedule of Condition.  This alters the repair clause so that the tenant is not required to put the demised premises into any better repair than at the start of the lease, as evidenced by a photographic schedule of condition, which should be annexed to the lease prior to completion. It is obviously in the tenant’s interest that this photographic record is both accurate and sufficiently detailed, particularly in showing existing disrepair.

 

Insurance

In a standard FRI lease, the landlord insures the whole of the property, and recharges amongst the tenants the cost of obtaining this insurance.  For this reason, tenants will also want to check that the repair clause excludes any damage caused by an insured risk, and that the insurance clauses require the landlord to use the insurance proceeds to repair the premises. Tenants will also want to check the list of risks the landlord is required to insure against is comprehensive.

Owing to a tendency for insurance contracts to contain more exceptions and restrictions than was historically the case, modern leases frequently include a definition of “Uninsured risks”; these are risks which would be an insured risk except for an exclusion imposed by insurers or because insurance against the risk is simply unavailable on the market.  It is to the tenant’s advantage if it is not required to repair damage caused by an uninsured risk under the lease as well; otherwise the tenant’s repair clause would technically still apply, and they could end up liable for repair costs the tenant was not expecting.

 

Inherent Defects

This will particularly be of concern for tenants of new premises. An inherent defect is a defect in the construction of a building owing to materials, design etc. which was not immediately apparent on that building’s construction. An example would be where a design flaw in a building allowed water ingress which caused damage to the interior of the building.

A tenant will not be required to correct the latent defect, but any damage resulting to the tenant’s demise would usually fall within the tenant’s repair clause in the usual way. In the water ingress example, the tenant would not have to fix the building to prevent ingress, but would ordinarily be responsible for repairing any resulting damage to their demise caused by the water ingress.

Tenants (particularly tenants of new premises) may therefore wish to try and agree a clause whereby any disrepair caused as a result of an inherent defect is the landlord’s responsibility, rather than the tenant’s.   

To find out more, contact Jonathan Broad or the Commercial Property Team. 

 

Oak Lodge Meadow is home to the club’s clubhouse and three senior pitches and plays an important role in the local community in Beaconsfield Old Town. The new lease secures the long-term future of the club at this site, following discussions with the Council which began over five years ago.

The club required a lease that would provide long-term security and allow it to continue operating and investing in its facilities. Terry and Mike worked closely with the club and the Council to help bring negotiations to a successful conclusion, providing clear and practical advice throughout what had been a lengthy process.

A spokesperson for the club said “The new lease secures the long-term future of the Club and keeps us at the heart of the local community in Beaconsfield Old Town. A huge thanks to our lawyers Terry Fendt and Mike Jenkins of Sherrards for their excellent assistance and extreme patience.”

We are delighted to have supported the club in reaching this important milestone and securing its future for the next 35 years.

To find out more or contact the Commercial Property team click here.

Who is Legally Liable for Business Rates in a Commercial Lease?

The general legal principle is that the party in rateable occupation of the property is liable for business rates. In most leasehold arrangements, that will be the tenant in occupation.

Commercial leases usually reinforce this position. They typically require the tenant to:

• Pay all non-domestic rates and similar outgoings; and
• Indemnify the landlord if the landlord becomes liable.

In straightforward cases, the occupier receives the demand directly from the local authority and pays it.

However, the position becomes more complicated when occupation ends, when the property becomes vacant, or where a tenant fails to pay.

 

Reliefs and Exemptions

The headline rates bill is not always the final amount payable. A range of reliefs may apply, including Small Business Rates Relief, Retail, Hospitality and Leisure relief, charitable relief and empty property exemptions. Eligibility depends on factors such as rateable value, property use and the occupier’s wider holdings. Relief is not always applied automatically, so both landlords and tenants should check their position carefully.

 

2026 Update: New Support for Retail, Hospitality, and Leisure

It is important to note recent government measures designed to support high-street occupiers.

From April 2026, the business rates system is undergoing a significant shift. The previous temporary 40% Retail, Hospitality and Leisure (RHL) relief is being replaced by a what is being described as ‘a permanently lower tax rate (multiplier)’ for properties with a rateable value under £500,000. This aims to provide long-term certainty for shops, restaurants, and cafes.

Furthermore, in a boost for the night-time economy, the government recently announced:

• A 15% Business Rates Relief specifically for eligible pubs and live music venues for the 2026/27 financial year.
• A 2-year freeze in real terms for these venues, protecting them from inflationary hikes through to 2028.

While these reliefs are welcome, they are often subject to strict eligibility criteria regarding how the property is “wholly or mainly” used. Landlords and tenants should verify their status now to ensure these savings are reflected in their 2026/27 billing.

 

Rateable Value and Challenges

The amount of business rates payable is based on the property’s rateable value, which is set by the Valuation Office Agency (VOA). The rateable value reflects the VOA’s assessment of the property’s rental value at a specified valuation date. If the figure appears incorrect, it may be challenged through the formal “Check, Challenge, Appeal” process, although strict procedures and time limits apply.

 

What Happens If a Tenant Stops Paying and Disappears?

A common concern for landlords is whether the local authority can pursue them for unpaid rates where a tenant has been in occupation but has failed to pay and has effectively “disappeared”.

In principle, liability rests with the party in rateable occupation during the relevant period. If the tenant was genuinely in occupation, the tenant is primarily liable.

However, in practice:

• The local authority will pursue whoever it considers legally liable based on the rating list and available information.
• If occupation is unclear, disputed or difficult to prove, the authority may look to the landlord.
• If the tenant has become insolvent or cannot be traced, recovery may prove commercially unrealistic.

Once the tenant’s occupation ends, liability will usually revert to the landlord (subject to any empty property relief). That can happen quickly if a tenant vacates unexpectedly.

Landlords therefore need to monitor occupation carefully and act promptly if premises are abandoned.

 

The Void Rates Issue

Empty commercial properties benefit from only a short exemption period (generally three months, or six months for industrial premises). After that, full rates become payable.

This creates a key commercial tension:
who bears the risk of rates during periods of vacancy?

• If a tenant ceases trading but the lease continues, liability will usually remain with the tenant.
• Simply handing back the keys does not end responsibility.
• A break clause that is not exercised strictly in accordance with its terms may leave a tenant liable for ongoing rent and rates.

From a landlord’s perspective, the risk is exposure to rates during void periods between lettings. From a tenant’s perspective, the concern is being tied to liability for premises that are no longer generating income.

Market conditions and bargaining strength will often determine how this risk is allocated.

 

Where Rates Are “Included in the Rent”

Some leases — particularly serviced or short-term arrangements — provide that business rates are included within the rent.

While this can simplify budgeting, it does not necessarily remove risk.

If the landlord fails to pay the local authority, the council may still pursue the party in rateable occupation. In other words, the tenant may remain “on the hook” despite having paid an inclusive rent.

Clear drafting and proper administration are critical to avoid disputes.

 

Additional Risks to Consider

Tenants should be aware of:

• Continuing liability if vacant possession is not properly given at lease expiry.
• Service charge provisions recovering rates on common parts.
• Rating revaluations increasing liability mid-term.
• Exposure if a break clause fails technically.

Landlords should consider:

• Recovery risk where a tenant becomes insolvent.
• The evidential burden of proving occupation for rating purposes.
• Immediate rates exposure once a property becomes vacant.

 

Why Early Advice Matters

Business rates can represent a substantial financial liability. The most significant exposure often arises not during stable occupation, but during transition — insolvency, abandonment, relocation or lease expiry.

When negotiating or reviewing a lease, it is important to understand:

• When liability begins and ends;
• How void risk is allocated;
• What happens if a tenant fails to pay; and
• Whether inclusive rent arrangements genuinely protect the parties.

Clear advice at the outset can prevent unexpected and costly outcomes later.

 

Find out more with our Commercial Property Team

Business rates are a significant and often fluctuating liability. Whether you are negotiating a new lease, managing a vacancy, or navigating the new 2026 relief schemes, early legal advice is essential to protecting your position.

To discuss how we can assist with your property portfolio, please contact a member of our Commercial Property Team.

 

Frequently, this can be done by means of a Deed of Variation, a relatively simple document either adding, removing or amending specified clauses in a lease.

There are, however, certain scenarios where care should be taken.  These two main scenarios are if the variation required:

(i)            adds to the lease demise (e.g. if the landlord and tenant decide to add a room within a building to the area being leased); or

(ii)           extends the length of the term of the lease term (e.g. changing a four year lease into a five year lease).

Both of these variations are deemed to be so fundamental to the underlying lease that it can only occur by the fiction of the existing lease being surrendered, and a new lease being granted.  This deemed surrender and regrant happens regardless of the intention of the parties, and can arise inadvertently. 

Such a deemed surrender and regrant can cause several issues for both the landlord and the tenant.

 

For the landlord

If the original lease had been validly contracted out of the security of tenure provisions of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, an accidental deemed surrender and regrant would lead to the creation of a new lease for which no such contracting out process had taken place.  The landlord would therefore inadvertently have granted a lease with the benefit of security of tenure contrary to their original intentions.  This would severely limit the landlord’s ability to remove the tenant even at the end of the contractual term.

Leases granted after 1 January 1996 are subject to privity of contract provisions of the Landlord and Tenant Covenants Act 1995.  If the original lease was granted prior to 1996, it is extremely unlikely to include clauses relating to Authorised Guarantee Agreements on assignment.  An unintentional deemed surrender and regrant could therefore jeopardise a landlord’s ability to enforce against former tenants in the event the current tenant becomes insolvent.  Equally, a deemed surrender and regrant will release former tenants and guarantors of the existing lease for liability under the new lease.  Both of these weaken the landlord’s position in the event the existing tenant becomes insolvent.

If the landlord has mortgaged their interest, the terms of the mortgage will usually require lender’s consent for any surrender or grant of a lease.  An accidental deemed surrender and regrant would breach such provisions leaving the landlord open to enforcement by the lender.   

If the landlord holds a leasehold interest, the terms of the superior lease may require superior landlord’s consent to a surrender or grant of a sublease.  An accidental deemed surrender and regrant would breach these requirements, which could make the landlord’s lease liable for forfeiture.

 

For the tenant

The tenant may be liable for SDLT (stamp duty land tax) on the new lease.  Even where reliefs such as overlap relief may apply, it is unlikely the tenant will realise the potential SDLT liability in time on an accidental surrender and regrant, and find themselves subject to penalties for late returns or late payment of SDLT.

If the new lease is for a term of seven years or more it is compulsorily registrable at the Land Registry.  For an accidental surrender and regrant, it is likely the tenant will not realise the requirement for registration.  Failure to effect registration at the Land Registry within two months will lead to the legal estate becoming void and the lease taking effect as an agreement for lease under the Land Registration Act 2002.  This is perhaps less likely to occur as the tenant will usually want to register a Deed of Variation in any case, and the Land Registry would pick up on the issue.  Nonetheless, it can take some sorting at the Land Registry and so is best avoided.

If the tenant has mortgaged their leasehold interest, it is likely an accidental deemed surrender and regrant will breach the tenant’s mortgage.

 

Other variations which created a deemed surrender and regrant

Whilst an addition of land to the demise and an extension to the term are the main circumstances in which a deemed surrender and regrant can take place, other variations can lead to a surrender and regrant.  A variation which did not extend the lease term, but which provided the tenant with an option to extend the term was held to create a deemed surrender and regrant. 

 

Avoiding a deemed surrender and regrant

There are ways to document variations so as to avoid a deemed surrender and regrant: e.g. by granting a reversionary lease to take effect at the end of the existing one, or by granting a supplemental lease of the additional area to be added to the demise.

If you have any questions or would like to learn more, please contact Jonathan Broad, Associate in our Commercial Property team.

It’s pretty widely known that the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 (LTA 1954) grants “security of tenure” to commercial tenants – i.e. commercial tenants (with a few exceptions) have the right to renew their leases when the contractual lease term comes to an end.

However, landlords and tenants can agree to exclude (or “contract out”) that security of tenure when they enter into their agreement for lease or lease by following a (slightly clunky) process. If security of tenure is excluded, the tenant does not have the right to a new lease at the end of the lease term.

What’s happened this year?

The LTA 1954 has been under a microscope this year as The Law Commission consulted on whether to reform it. As a 70+ year old, post war, piece of legislation, with a dramatically different market now from when it was enacted (co-working spaces, increasing hybrid working and pop up retail to name just a few things), it’s not surprising that it may need a refresh – the question is, how extensive should that rethink be (spoiler: not all that extensive as it happens!).

The Consultation

The Law Commission closed its first consultation earlier this year. The Commission received over 160 consultation responses from a wide range of stakeholders, including landlords, tenants, professionals and representative organisations.

The consultation covered a range of questions, including:

1. Whether the current “contracting-out” model of security of tenure should be retained, or a different model be adopted. Different models considered including mandatory security of tenure, abolishing security of tenure, or switching to a “contract-in” rather than “contract-out” system.

Law Society’s provisional conclusion: Retain the current model. Responses were overwhelmingly in support of this; saying that the current model strikes a balance between landlords and tenants and that to change it would unnecessarily disrupt the market.

2. What types of tenancy should benefit from security of tenure under the LTA 1954.

Law Society’s provisional conclusion: The current structure is correct – i.e. the list of tenancies that are not able to benefit from the security of tenure provisions is correct. This list includes agricultural tenancies, mining leases and short-term tenancies (although – see below on those).

3. What duration of tenancy should benefit from security of tenure under the LTA 1954.

Law Society’s provisional conclusion: As mentioned above, short-term tenancies are automatically excluded from security of tenure. Currently, a short-term tenancy for this purposes means a tenancy of up to six months. The consultation asked whether this threshold is appropriate.

The Commission reported that responses on this point were mixed, but generally there was support for increasing the threshold to give greater flexibility in the short-term lettings market. As a result, the Commission plans to hold a second consultation on extending the threshold to two years.

A few thoughts

The provisional conclusions do not indicate a sweeping change to the LTA 1954. The Law Commission’s approach is a pragmatic one along the lines of not breaking something that (on balance) is working.

Having said that (at least from lawyers on the front line, and clients who pay them!), there is a growing frustration with the convoluted aspects of the security of tenure process with its notices, counter-notices, statutory declarations and rigid timelines. At the very least, it would be good to see a more streamlined and modernised process given the age of technology that we are increasingly experiencing.

Next steps

The Law Commission will consult again later this year with a final report to the Government expected in 2026. This consultation will focus on its provisional conclusions from the first consultation and may go into more detail about what any proposed changes would actually look like and whether any transitional rules will be required.

As ever, the devil will be in the detail (and also whether, and how quickly, resulting legislation makes it through to the Government’s agenda).

Until then, we will watch the space….

If you have any questions, or want to find out more. Contact our Commercial Property team, or Claire Chillingworth. 

Effective 1 October 2025, Christopher Piggott has been promoted from Senior Associate to Legal Director. Chris joined Sherrards in August 2023 and has since played an important role in the success of the department, supporting clients and colleagues alike. In his new role, Chris will take on wider responsibilities, including developing and maintaining client relationships, mentoring junior lawyers, and contributing to the continued growth of the team.

We are also pleased to announce that Mike Jenkins has successfully completed his training contract, gained his practising certificate, and qualified as a Solicitor in the Commercial Property team as of the 25^th of September. Mike has demonstrated dedication and commitment throughout his training, and we are delighted to see him progress in his career with the firm.

The Commercial Property team at Sherrards continues to expand and deliver specialist advice to a wide range of clients, both locally and nationally. The promotions highlight our focus on investing in people and ensuring our clients benefit from strong, experienced teams.

Please join us in congratulating Chris and Mike on their fantastic achievements.

Sherrards’ commercial property and corporate team advised The Darkness drummer Rufus Taylor on the purchase of The Shipwrights Arms, a well-known gastropub with four luxury letting suites in the coastal village of Helford near Falmouth in Cornwall which overlooks the beautiful Helford Estuary.

The freehold acquisition marks an exciting new chapter for the property, which has long been a fixture of the local hospitality scene. The venue attracted national media coverage following the purchase, not only for its iconic location but also due to the involvement of Rufus’ father, Queen drummer Roger Taylor, in supporting the transaction.

Sherrards advised on all legal aspects of the acquisition, including property due diligence, negotiation of the contract, and commercial considerations relevant to the site’s future use. The deal involved a heritage property with mixed use and strategic potential, requiring clear and pragmatic legal advice throughout.

Senior Consultant Solicitor, Richard Berns led the transaction for Sherrards, drawing on significant experience in commercial property to guide the process from initial instruction through to completion. Jean-Paul Da Costa led the business aspects of the acquisition working hand in hand with Richard, as they have done many times over the last 30 years.

Sherrards are pleased to have played a role in supporting Rufus on this high-profile acquisition and look forward to seeing how The Shipwrights Arms continues to evolve under its new ownership.

For a taste of what’s to come (and perhaps a pint with a side of rock’n’roll), visit The Shipwrights Arms.

The project involved seven historical buildings at Camden Stables Market, just by Regent’s Canal, a complex site requiring tight coordination. The Sherrards team worked closely with Live Odyssey and other stakeholders to secure vacant possession across all buildings, negotiate and complete the new lease, assist with planning permission and new operating licence, and navigate a range of practical and legal complexities, all within a very limited timeframe to support an immovable launch date.

The buildings’ location, heritage status and the innovative nature of the venue meant that every piece of the puzzle had to fit precisely and quickly. There were plenty of moving parts, but our team handled the negotiations and legal frameworks with clarity and speed, ensuring Live Odyssey could open its doors as planned.

Live Odyssey is an immersive and interactive tribute to six decades of British music, combining live performances, holograms, 3D visuals, and themed bars in a high-tech, multi-room venue. It’s a bold and exciting new addition to London’s live entertainment scene, offering visitors a two-and-a-half-hour journey through the UK’s most iconic musical moments, from The Clash to Queen.

The transaction was led by Senior Associate Christopher Piggott, and the Sherrards team also included Terry Fendt, Partner and Head of the Commercial Property team. Their deep experience with complex, multi-party property transactions – and their calm, practical approach under pressure, helped guide the project through to a successful conclusion.

We’re proud to support such an innovative and culturally significant venue, and we love supporting innovative businesses like Live Odyssey as they redefine what’s possible in live entertainment.

Live Odyssey is now open, click here to see what the fuss is all about!