Diplomatic clause

[amerlok]

Tired of the uniquely Singaporean interpretation of what constitutes a "diplomatic clause," I engaged a lawyer and thought I'd share the following language. It's said that the law is "pro-landlord," but that's only because the same boilerplate lease agreement has been circulating for years.
Granted, my landlord acquiesced in the context of a renewal after my strong position that the first 24 months had more than satisfied the "standard" 12+2 clause.
Still, it's worth a try for a new lease as we're currently doing - particularly since these are the terms of a "diplomatic clause" everywhere else that I've lived.
The landlord gets the two months' notice (twice as long as some diplomatic clauses) and, potentially, reimbursement of the Estate Agent commission. Fair and square.

"Notwithstanding the term of [12/24] months, it may be wholly determined at any point in time after the commencement of the term by the Tenant giving to the Landlord two (2) calendar months' notice in writing of the Tenant’s intention to end the tenancy or two (2) months’ rent in lieu of such notice if either Tenant [single or co-tenant] shall (a) die, (b) become physically and/or mentally disabled, (c) be required to leave Singapore permanently on a job transfer, (d) be required by the relevant law or authorities to leave Singapore, or (e) if his/her/their employment in Singapore is terminated for any reason whatsoever. Provided always that the said written notice shall be accompanied by documentary evidence proving the event relied upon by the Tenant in the said written notice."

[JR8]

Tired of the uniquely Singaporean interpretation of what constitutes a "diplomatic clause," I engaged a lawyer and thought I'd share the following language. It's said that the law is "pro-landlord," but that's only because the same boilerplate lease agreement has been circulating for years.

If the same TA has been in general use for years it is IMHO likely due to the fact that the foundation L+T Statutes haven’t changed in years.

Granted, my landlord acquiesced in the context of a renewal after my strong position that the first 24 months had more than satisfied the "standard" 12+2 clause. Still, it's worth a try for a new lease as we're currently doing - particularly since these are the terms of a "diplomatic clause" everywhere else that I've lived.

I don’t understand how fulfilling the minimum term (in order to serve Notice) on one TA, carries over if you enter into a new TA. In the latter case surely the timeline resets and your period of tenure starts again. Unless you mean that you agreed to enter into an extension to the pre-existing TA.

"Notwithstanding the term of [12/24] months, it may be wholly determined at any point in time after the commencement of the term by the Tenant giving to the Landlord two (2) calendar months' notice in writing of the Tenant’s intention to end the tenancy or two (2) months’ rent in lieu of such notice if either Tenant [single or co-tenant] shall (a) die, (b) become physically and/or mentally disabled, (c) be required to leave Singapore permanently on a job transfer, (d) be required by the relevant law or authorities to leave Singapore, or (e) if his/her/their employment in Singapore is terminated for any reason whatsoever. Provided always that the said written notice shall be accompanied by documentary evidence proving the event relied upon by the Tenant in the said written notice."

Is this supposed to be the benchmark? Curious as I’ve never heard of Grounds a) or b) before. Whereas c/d/e are IME standard Grounds.
Finding yourself dead, in a wheel-chair or ‘struck mental’ are Grounds to exercise a diplomatic clause? ... it’s probably not worth discussing those Grounds much further (if they are true), since hopefully they’d apply to veeery few people. Thought-provoking though the idea is.

[sundaymorningstaple]

I don't know, JR8, the way Singaporeans drive, it's likely that one could very well be the victim of a "safe" driver here. Any one of the three could likely happen.

[amerlok]

That's the point - there shouldn't be a timeline, so why should it reset?
Happy to be directed to the relevant L+T statutes. I only found "rules of thumb."
In my own case, a-e apply for a co-tenancy - you'd be surprised, death does not automatically terminate a contract.

[JR8]

@SMS, well quite, maybe you drive a Ferrari or McLaren, in which case as we all know the laws of anything never-mind physics do not apply.

@Amerlok. What do you mean 'there shouldn't be a timeline'?

----
contract
1) n. an agreement with specific terms between two or more persons or entities in which there is a promise to do something in return for a valuable benefit known as consideration. Since the law of contracts is at the heart of most business dealings, it is one of the three or four most significant areas of legal concern and can involve variations on circumstances and complexities. The existence of a contract requires finding the following factual elements: a) an offer; b) an acceptance of that offer which results in a meeting of the minds; c) a promise to perform; d) a valuable consideration (which can be a promise or payment in some form); e) a time or event when performance must be made (meet commitments); f) terms and conditions for performance, including fulfilling promises; g) performance. [continues]
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/contract
-------

I'd suggest that before making what appear to be authoritative posts you understand what you're talking about. And if you don't fully understand an issue, seeking clarification and learning about it.

[amerlok]

JR8, good to see that you're Feeling Lucky with Google.

Clearly, contracts have terms. The topic here is diplomatic clauses, which by definition aren't designed to protect the landord.

In my case, c/d/e are in the context of a co-tenancy. But in the standard language, they only apply after what is effectively a 14-month lock-up that puts an investor's yield before an expat (co)tenant's professional mobility. Again, in a "diplomatic clause."

[JR8]

JR8, good to see that you're Feeling Lucky with Google.

Clearly, contracts have terms. The topic here is diplomatic clauses, which by definition aren't designed to protect the landord.

In my case, c/d/e are in the context of a co-tenancy. But in the standard language, they only apply after what is effectively a 14-month lock-up that puts an investor's yield before an expat (co)tenant's professional mobility. Again, in a "diplomatic clause."

Good luck with your 'day in court', let us know how you get on.

[x9200]

Time-line: OP probably meant this initial waiting period of 12 month typically present in the SG TAs.

Some other points.

- Of course the death of the tenant does not remove the obligations (it only invalidates these of personal nature). Think about it as if you would borrow some money. The lender can be still after whoever inherited any goods from you.

For the two points below, if I were the LL I would never accept the TA with such wording.

- (b) Physical/mental disability... it needs to be defined (e.g. having a finger broken o being pissed would do?)

- For the (e) point, it can not be for any reason whatsoever (e.g. I quit the job and get a better one, also in SG)

[aaronsarah]

We have a 24month contract for our condo. If we were to terminate this at 14 months due to me resigning from my job to move back to the UK will it still be OK under the diplomatic clause or would we have to see out the contract? Or find another tennent to take over the lease?

[x9200]

The diplomatic clause? You mean you have it identical as in the first post?

[Strong Eagle]

As I recall, "diplomatic clauses" rarely include a voluntary termination of employment and almost always are invocable only if the employee has been terminated without recourse.

What does the language of your clause say?

[chevrel123]

Is the diplomatic clause applicable in case of resignation? The clause in my tenancy agreement includes "if tenant's employment in Singapore is terminated for any reason whatsoever". It does not say that the termination should be by the employer.

[sundaymorningstaple]

There is a big difference between termination and resignation. Check your dictionary. So, you answer is not it's not applicable and it's gonna get expensive.

[sundaymorningstaple]

Legally.

[chevrel123]

There is a big difference between termination and resignation. Check your dictionary. So, you answer is not it's not applicable and it's gonna get expensive.

Termination of employment may be voluntary.

http://www.businessdictionary.com/defin ... ation.html

My employment contract with my company even states that my employment may be terminated by either me (through resignation) or the company.

I have consulted with agents and they agreed that resignation is included in the diplomatic clause since it states that termination may be for any reason whatsoever. Even LL's agent told me that he agrees with me and tried talking to the LL but LL refuses to abide by the TA.