The question of payment of the cost of alterations made to leased premises by a tenant is an important issue in the relationship between the tenant and the landlord. There are many factors affecting arrangements as to the cost of alterations, such as the duration of the lease, the premises leased, and the envisaged outlays on the part of the tenant.
The Supreme Administrative Court recently reviewed a case concerning unauthorised change of use of real estate. According to the construction permit it was supposed to be a residential part of a building, but was converted into rooms to be let.
Property development projects are on the rise, accompanied by rising costs of building materials. Can contractors with old contracts which do not reflect inflation validly demand a higher fixed fee?
Real estate has to be consolidated and covered by a single land and mortgage register for example when someone wishes to create separate units in a building standing on two plots listed in separate land and mortgage registers. Before commencing a development project it is also advisable to commission a legal analysis to determine whether the legal criteria for this measure are fulfilled; otherwise this could prove difficult or impossible.
The rent, terms of payment and rent abatement period are all important factors for parties entering into commercial leases. Given the ongoing growth of the real estate market, the negotiated rent may fall well below market value within a couple of years. This is why long fixed-term lease agreements (which can be terminated only in situations specified in the lease agreement or when provided by law) should ensure that the rent amount remains acceptable to both parties for the duration of the lease. An indexation clause is one way to do this.
Change of the purpose of perpetual usufruct: Is it necessary to conclude an agreement and pay compensation?
Local governments and authorities representing the State Treasury accuse developers of planning projects or making other changes in the current manner of use of real estate inconsistent with the purpose for which perpetual usufruct was established. Then they offer the perpetual usufructuary an agreement changing the use of the property in exchange for compensation. Is there any justification for such actions?