Real Estate Lawyer
Due diligence determines whether property is actually buyable and at what risk level. Title verification, encumbrance checks, possession verification, and regulatory approval status all matter. But due diligence is not pass-fail exercise. Every property has some issues. The question is whether issues are acceptable risks or deal-breakers. Some properties have minor documentation gaps posing minimal practical risk. Others have fundamental defects making purchase inadvisable at any price. Effective due diligence assesses risk levels and advises about what matters versus what doesn't. Property with minor gaps might be better buy than property with perfect paperwork but possession problems.
Builder-buyer agreements need provisions protecting buyers beyond standard builder drafts. Builders draft agreements favouring themselves—minimal delay penalties, flexible completion definitions, specification changes without buyer consent. Representing buyers means negotiating changes. Some battles are winnable—reasonable possession delay penalties, clear completion definitions, buyer rights to verify construction quality. Other battles are non-starters—builders will not accept unlimited liability or buyer control over construction. Real estate practice requires knowing which contract terms are negotiable and which are not. Fighting unwinnable battles wastes time and goodwill.
Land acquisition for development involves issues beyond sale transactions. Zoning compliance, environmental clearances, demolition permissions, building plan approvals all matter. Buying land without checking development feasibility can render property undevelopable. Some areas have restrictions—green zones, airport height limits, heritage regulations. Others face practical limitations like narrow access preventing construction material delivery. Advising on land acquisition requires considering development feasibility rather than just title perfection. Property with clear title but undevelopable land provides zero value to developers.
Joint development agreements between landowners and developers create partnerships requiring careful structuring. Landowners contribute property, developers contribute construction costs and expertise, both share finished product. These arrangements work beautifully when structured properly. They create disasters when vaguely drafted or when parties don't fulfill obligations. JDA disputes involve landowners claiming improper construction or developers taking excess area. Developers claim landowner interference or failure to provide promised approvals. Drafting JDAs requires specifying rights, obligations, timelines, and dispute mechanisms with precision. Vague JDAs create disputes, not developments.
Commercial real estate involves different issues than residential property. Commercial lease agreements need different provisions than residential leases. Commercial valuations depend on rental yields and occupancy rates rather than just location. Disputes involve rent escalation, maintenance responsibilities, lease termination rights. Handling commercial property requires understanding business considerations alongside legal requirements. Applying residential law approaches to commercial deals misses critical issues about tenant improvements, permitted uses, and subletting rights that matter in commercial contexts but not residential ones.
Real estate litigation becomes necessary when transactions fail, builders don't deliver, or disputes arise post-purchase. Some disputes involve title conflicts requiring civil suits. Others involve consumer complaints against builders for non-delivery. Still others require recovery suits for advance payments on cancelled transactions. Litigation strategy depends on specific problem—possession disputes need different approaches than title disputes, builder defaults need consumer forum remedies more than civil suits. Matching legal remedies to specific problems is more effective than defaulting to generic civil litigation that might not be optimal solution.
