Can you evict tenant while still under the lease term? Couldnt understand break clause

[thinkandgrow]

I could not understand the break clause, would someone clarify the meaning of this?

Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, hereinbefore contained, either party shall be entitled to terminate this agreement earlier than as herein provided by serving not less than 1 month written notice or by paying 1 month rental in lieu to the other party provided than the said written notice shall not be served before the expiration of 23 month of the term of tenancy.

Does this mean either party can only give written notice after 23 months of the term?

[shri]

I think shall not = can only .... after ...

I *HATE* all this pretentiousness in contract language.

[bdw]

I'm a landlord and this is exactly what I signed with my tenant previously when we agreed to a two year fixed contract (no break clause). There is a section in the contract regarding break clause, but if want a fixed contract with no break clause then you put the number in here that is equal to the length of contract minus 1.

[walkup]

Standard 2 year contracts are often referred to as 1+1. The break clause refers to when either party can give notice to terminate the agreement, which in a 1+1 contract is after one year. So, if the notice period is 1 month, then the tenant can either quit or have the tenancy terminated after 13 months. If a landlord wants to evict a tenant during the first year, however, then would need to take legal action.

[bdw]

Standard 2 year contracts are often referred to as 1+1. The break clause refers to when either party can give notice to terminate the agreement, which in a 1+1 contract is after one year. So, if the notice period is 1 month, then the tenant can either quit or have the tenancy terminated after 13 months. If a landlord wants to evict a tenant during the first year, however, then would need to take legal action.

What you right is all perfectly correct for a standard 2 year contract with 1 year break clause. However, if you read the first post carefully, it sounds like a 2 year fixed contract with no break clause. The break clause has been set at 23 months, which is normally what you wil write down in that section of the contract if you dont want it to apply. ie set the break clause to one month before the end of the 2 year contract.

So I would think in this case, both tenant and landlord are fixed to these terms for 2 years and neither party can terminate at all for 2 years, unless both parties voluntarily agree to it.

[GRRR]

I'm a landlord and this is exactly what I signed with my tenant previously when we agreed to a two year fixed contract (no break clause). There is a section in the contract regarding break clause, but if want a fixed contract with no break clause then you put the number in here that is equal to the length of contract minus 1.

There is no need for a break clause if it is a 2 year fixed term tenancy agreement with no option year/period e.g. the entire term of the tenancy is equal to the fixed term period. You can simply remove the break clause.

A break clause is usually only required when the term of the tenancy exceeds the fixed term portion i.e. the term of tenancy is composed of both a fixed term period and an option period.

[GRRR]

What you right is all perfectly correct for a standard 2 year contract with 1 year break clause. However, if you read the first post carefully, it sounds like a 2 year fixed contract with no break clause. The break clause has been set at 23 months, which is normally what you wil write down in that section of the contract if you dont want it to apply. ie set the break clause to one month before the end of the 2 year contract.

Most likely (if the tenancy agreement is properly written), this would be a greater than 2 year tenancy agreement composed of a 2 year fixed term portion and the remaining period being optional (subject to early termination with notice).

So I would think in this case, both tenant and landlord are fixed to these terms for 2 years and neither party can terminate at all for 2 years, unless both parties voluntarily agree to it.

The LL can also evict the tenant during the fixed term period if the tenant fails to pay rent.

[redslert]

There is no need for a break clause if it is a 2 year fixed term tenancy agreement with no option year/period e.g. the entire term of the tenancy is equal to the fixed term period. You can simply remove the break clause.

A break clause is usually only required when the term of the tenancy exceeds the fixed term portion i.e. the term of tenancy is composed of both a fixed term period and an option period.

Ideally you still retain the clause even if it is unenforceable to remove any reasonable doubt.

[GRRR]

Ideally you still retain the clause even if it is unenforceable to remove any reasonable doubt.

Sure, you could do that although it would be moot.

If your goal is remove any reasonable doubt, then it would be better to state it explicitly, for example:

There is no break clause. Neither party shall be entitled to terminate this agreement earlier than as herein provided.

[VillanElle]

Why evict tenant? @thinkandgrow