by Jackie Buckley February-03-2016 in Property
In Camiveo Limited v Dunnes Stores, the High Court granted an interlocutory injunction restraining Dunnes Stores from disabling the automatic opening mechanism of its doors during opening hours in the Edward Square Shopping Centre, Galway.
Dunnes Stores held the premises under a lease dated 3 April 2000 and, although the text of the lease did not refer to “anchor unit”, the cover page of the lease described it as “lease of Anchor Unit Edward Square Shopping Centre, Barrack Lane, Galway”.
Main entrance and exit
Mr. Justice Brian J. McGovern noted that until the doors were closed on 17 June 2015, they had been operating normally for a period of 15 years as a means of access to and egress from the premises during normal shopping hours. It was argued that the doors were designed and intended to be the main entrance and exit at the premises and were operated as such for 15 years. Although there were a number of other entrances and exits at other locations in the store, the evidence suggested that they were not the principal entrance or exit. The doors gave access onto Castle Street/Barrack Lane which was the common concourse from which all shops in the Edward Square Shopping Centre could be accessed.
The court noted that it was not forming any final view on the issues between the parties at this stage but was concerned with maintaining the status quo and it noted that the landlord had raised a fair or bona fide or serious issue to be tried.
The court decided that the description of the lease as being in respect of the anchor tenant was significant. It was also clear that the lease was in respect of one of a number of premises in a shopping centre. McGovern J. noted that the doors in question were the only entrance to the Dunnes premises from Castle Street/Barrack Lane. It noted that if the purpose of having an anchor tenant is to draw shoppers to the premises of that tenant and thereby benefit the other tenants in the centre, that it “would seem odd and contrary to normal commercial letting principles that the premises of the anchor tenant cannot be accessed from Castle Street/Barrack Lane which is the common concourse serving all the premises in the shopping centre”.
It noted that there was a substantial body of evidence to suggest that in the minds of the planning authority, linkage between the Edward Square Shopping Centre and Eyre Square Shopping Centre was important to create connectivity between different parts of the city centre.
Preserving the status quo
Regarding the balance of convenience, the court noted that the application merely sought to preserve the status quo which existed up until the doors were closed. McGovern J. was satisfied that the defendant would not be unfairly inconvenienced by making the doors available as a means of entry to and egress from its premises until final determination of the dispute. Damages were held not to be an adequate remedy for the landlord, if said application was refused. An arguable case was made regarding the various tenants’ property rights which would be adversely affected should the doors remain closed and which would also have an effect on the landlord.
This decision clearly reinforces the significance of an anchor tenant to a shopping centre and its importance to the other tenants in terms of attracting and enticing customers to the shopping centre. It is made very clear that a court will be willing to grant injunctions to preserve the status quo of a situation pending final determination of the issues by the court.
Back to Full NewsShare this article:
About the Author
Jackie Buckley
Jackie is Head of the Property team at Hayes solicitors. She is a highly experienced adviser to clients in the banking, public and retail sectors on all aspects of the sale, purchase, leasing, development and financing of properties. She has extensive experience of advising landlords and tenants in insolvency situations and has advised in recent high profile examinerships.