We use cookies to provide you with a better experience. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies in accordance with our Cookie Policy.
What Happened: A shopping center tenant exercised its supposed right to pay reduced rent under a co-tenancy clause that kicked in when either: (1) the center lacked either three anchor tenants; or (2) 60 percent of the space wasn’t leased. While acknowledging that a trigger condition had occurred (that is, the closing of anchors Sports Chalet and Toys “R” Us), the landlord claimed the reduced rent was an unenforceable penalty, citing a 2015 California case called Grand Prospect Partners, L.P. v.
