(by dealing with options with the contractual partner before expiration) and averts this repurchase.
Of course; and only then realizes that one is in a potentially very poor negotiating position. The leaseholder theoretically does not have to do anything unless something else was agreed (e.g. no right of renewal was granted).
can compensation then be contractually excluded?
Theoretically yes; practically not, because case law has apparently spoken on this. The few contracts I know explicitly mention the 2/3.
For the OP , however, three aspects will actually be important.
- Is only a right of first refusal agreed, or is it actually allowed to be purchased at any time? Some people tend to confuse that.
- And whether something like the following is stated:
"Encumbrances on the leasehold may not exceed 90 percent of the construction costs excluding the architect's fees."
- And how the extension of the leasehold for the affected property is regulated. In other words, is there at least a right of renewal? (which alone means nothing; one could circumvent that by not agreeing on a right of first refusal and not wanting to continue operating the property as leasehold (layperson’s opinion).
Therefore, one should first discuss the contract here and not legal texts
This discussion so far should already make clear that leasehold can be a field full of mines. Especially if the seller cannot provide this initially.
and depending on the actual arrangement, it is not worth 35 years. Therefore, also have this professionally reviewed after disposition.