The Court held that where a registered lease defines 'Premises' to include the 'Building' erected on the land, market rent under a rent review clause referencing the 'Premises' must be assessed by reference to both the land and the building/improvements, notwithstanding that the tenant constructed the building and the lease originated as a ground lease arrangement. The Building was held to be a fixture forming part of the land (not a tenant's fixture) because the tenant had no right to sever and remove it — that right rested with the lessor under the Lessor Notice provisions — and accordingly the building could not be disregarded under the clause excluding 'Lessee's fixtures and fittings'. The Court also rejected a statutory unconscionability claim under ACL s 21, holding that enforcement of a lease according to its proper construction does not constitute unconscionable conduct absent special disadvantage or conduct outside accepted commercial standards, and set aside a prior expert valuation as not binding because the expert had not performed the task required by the contract.
The full text is available to signed-in members.