Legal Question in Real Estate Law in California

Re: Lease agreement

That would be a negotiation point where you can ask for more clarification to be inserted in the agreement. The obvious intent is that the present owners do not want any obligation to you if they are no longer operating the club, whether because of a sale or other reason for a change in ownership or closure. The question is whether this is fair for you. If they sell, what kind of prior notice would you receive? Do you have tenant improvements that you paid for that would be "lost"? Would it be more fair to require them to pay you something if you basically lose your business because they sell to someone that doesn't want to take over your lease? These are all points to discuss, negotiate, and have clarified in the document. Without knowing much more about your particular situation, I cannot make recommendations, but you need a better understanding of your rights and obligations under this lease.

Re: Lease agreement

I'd say your lease is unacceptably vague if there is no further definition or explanation of "closes," and also it seems that you are getting a sub-lease and if so, you'll have no greater rights than the prime tenant has - if the club lets its lease expire or gets evicted, you'll have no further rights.

If the tenant assigned its lease to another, your sublease would survive, just as a lease survives sale of the premises - but a sublease does not survive the loss of the lease upon which it is based.

You should ask more questions of the club people, have any further explanatory language put in the proposed agreement if it seems essential to make it clear, and request a copy of the master lease between the owner and the club, and read it.