Propertymark says the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 needs to be reframed to reflect current challenges like Minimum Energy Efficiency Standards for non-domestic property,

It also needs to be updated to consider greater protections for tenants against unfair claims of upkeep in England and Wales.  

When it was implemented, the 1954 Act aimed to provide security of tenure for tenants while addressing the right of landlords to manage their property.  

But the Law Commission is leading a wide-ranging review of the law which will regard, in detail, how the right to renew business tenancies, laid out in Part 2 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 is working and will consider choices for reform.   

Security of tenure for commercial leases was the central focus of this consultation, and the collated replies will constitute the Law Commission’s second consultation due later in the year.   

Their four different options in which security of tenure could work (also called models) include abolishing the 1954 Act, a ‘contracting in’ regime, a ‘contracting out’ regime, and compulsory security of tenure.   

In response to the Law Commission’s review, Propertymark has confirmed its support of the 1954 Act overall, especially when it comes to preserving security of tenure for tenants while maintaining a level of fairness to property owners. 

However, the industry body has called for reform to tenants’ contracts for leases of seven years or more, and for small businesses to gain protection from the law should they wish via negotiation, as opposed to scrapping the Act. This will ensure that the means of ‘contracting’ has been reformed to ensure the process is easier and up to date with current business practices.   

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.”