Propertymark has thrown its weight behind modernising the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 to address contemporary challenges facing commercial tenants and landlords.
The call for reform comes as the Law Commission conducts a sweeping review of the Act, examining how security of tenure for business tenants should function in today’s property market.
Enacted nearly 70 years ago, the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 was designed to balance security of tenure for tenants with landlords’ rights to manage their property.
However, Propertymark argues that the legislation is outdated and no longer aligns with evolving business needs, particularly in relation to Minimum Energy Efficiency Standards (MEES) and disputes over tenant responsibilities for property upkeep.
MODELS FOR REFORM
The Law Commission’s review is exploring four potential models for reform, ranging from abolishing the Act entirely to introducing different contractual regimes that would redefine security of tenure. A second consultation, informed by industry feedback, is expected later this year.
Propertymark has strongly supported the principle of security of tenure but insists that reforms must be made to ensure fairer protections for tenants – especially small businesses – without unduly burdening landlords.
Specifically, the organisation wants changes to lease contracts exceeding seven years and proposes that small businesses should be able to negotiate security of tenure protections under the law rather than face blanket application or removal of the Act.
TEST OF TIME
Tim Thomas, Policy and Campaigns Officer at Propertymark, says: “The 1954 Act has stood the test of time and is desirable for many commercial tenants for security of tenure to renew leases.
“However, for some, the act has become costly, burdensome and does not reflect the modern needs of businesses.
“We have consulted with commercial property agents across our membership, and it is our clear belief that the Act remains important but must be reformed towards greater flexibility while maintaining protection for those that require it.
“We look forward to continuing to engage with the Law Commission’s further review and call on the UK Government to consider the merits of changing the law.”
