Any tenant who has entered into a commercial lease in California is probably familiar with the standard lease language regarding the size of the leased premises:  the size set forth in the lease is an approximation which the parties agree is reasonable and the rent will not be changed if it turns out that the actual size is more or less.  Moreover, the lease will also state that the tenant has made any investigations it desires and is responsible for doing so (or not doing so).  Most tenants do not actually measure the space but instead rely on the integrity of the landlord.

In a recent California case entitled McClain v. Octagon Plaza, LLC, a shopping center tenant (McClain) sued the shopping center owner (Octagon) for misrepresentation of the size of the leased unit in the lease.

Background:  The parties entered into an AIR Standard Multi-Tenant Lease (Net) for a 2,624 square foot retail space.  Paragraph 1.2(a) described the size as “approximately 2,624 square feet” while paragraph 2.1 stated that the parties agree that this is an approximation which the parties agree is reasonable and that the rent is not subject to revision if the actual size is more or less.  The lease also required the tenant to pay Common Area Operating Expenses (CAMs) of 23%.