Whether or not the impact of the COVID-19 crisis on a party’s ability to perform its obligations will constitute a force majeure event enabling them to claim relief depends on the terms of the contract as applied to the precise circumstances. Where there is no force majeure clause, a party may in rare circumstances be able to invoke the doctrine of frustration.
For the past several months, businesses across the country have grappled with the question of whether the pandemic and local “stay at home” or “shelter in place” orders aimed at curbing the spread of COVID-19 trigger force majeure clauses in their leases and other contracts. In one of the first cases to consider this question, the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Illinois held in In re Hitz Restaurant Group that a restaurant tenant was entitled to a rent reduction under its force majeure clause due to Illinois Gov. J.B.
The landlord argued that the force majeure clause did not apply at all for three primary reasons. The Bankruptcy Court rejected each of the landlord’s arguments.
At the time of this writing, it’s not exactly another day in paradise, over 103,000 Americans are no longer with us, there are an estimated 1,500,000 confirmed U.S. cases of the coronavirus, and I am also ballparking at 40,000,000+ unemployment claims filed at the time of this writing, because just two weeks ago it was at 36,500,000. Obviously, it’s not hard to see and hear more gloom and doom in the news about the plummeting economy in the U.S.
Preparation of financial statements and corporate income tax, recommencement of time periods, remote trials, gradual return to workplaces, insolvency proceedings and compliance with criminal law
Questions from a landlord's perspective
My Tenant has asked for a rent holiday. I want to help them out at this time - how can I facilitate this?
Most landlords and tenants are working well together to reach agreement in respect of rent, either moving rental payments to monthly rather than quarterly in advance, or deferring rental obligations for a specified period. It is obviously preferable, but not necessarily essential, to have such arrangements documented in writing, as follows:
In a small victory for landlords of bankrupt tenants, the Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas has ruled that the Chuck E. Cheese parent company may not use its bankruptcy filing to avoid paying its rent.
The coronavirus pandemic has been particularly cruel to brick-and-mortar retail establishments. As rising infection rates force municipalities to roll back reopening plans, retail and hospitality businesses that rely on in-person sales to generate revenue are finding it impossible to manage fixed costs, especially rent. Many have sought shelter in chapter 11, only to discover that even the federal bankruptcy laws cannot always solve their rent problems.
What Does the Chapter 11 Tenant Owe its Landlord During the Bankruptcy Case?
In a new opinion issued in the Chuck E. Cheese bankruptcy cases, In re CEC Entertainment, Inc., Case No. 20-33163 (Bankr. S.D. Tex.),1 Judge Marvin Isgur of the U.S.
On December 14, 2020, Judge Marvin Isgur of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas, issued an important decision in the CEC Entertainment, Inc. (Chuck E. Cheese) bankruptcy case, Case No. 20-33163, denying the Debtors’ motion to abate their obligations to pay post-petition rent due to government shutdown orders issued as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. Memorandum Opinion [Dkt. No. 1492].