A further word of caution: CRAR and its relationship to forfeiture
We previously reported on the High Court decision in Thirunavukkrasu v Brar . Our previous article can be found here.
The issues have since been considered by the Court of Appeal who confirmed that use of the Commercial Rent Arrears Recovery (“CRAR”) procedure will waive the right to forfeit. The landlords’ appeal was dismissed on all three grounds.
The first ground was that the exercise of CRAR was a neutral act rather than an equivocal one confirming the existence of the lease. This was rejected by the Court of Appeal as ‘flawed on several grounds’.
The second ground was that the appellants, by their own admission, invalidly exercised CRAR and therefore there could be no waiver of the right to forfeit. This was rejected on the basis that this had ‘no merit’.
Thirdly, it was said that the effect of the Common Law Procedure Act 1852 meant that, providing six months or more rent was in arrears at the time CRAR was implemented, the landlords were still able to obtain an order for possession despite the previous exercise of CRAR. It was considered that this was not ‘seriously arguable’ and was therefore rejected.
So, it remains clear that landlords should seek early professional advice on their position so they fully understand the options and plan the most effective strategy.
If you need advice about CRAR, forfeiture or any other aspect of property litigation then contact me direct by emailing emma.webb@GAsolicitors.com or call 01752 513539.