Legally, how does &quot;prevail&quot; differ from &quot;will not be affected&quot;?
<p>Landlord — and I the Tenant — have agreed everything in a Commercial Lease, except one verb! Originally Tenant proffered</p>
<blockquote>
<p>All existing or future tenant legislation, rights and protection (e.g. against eviction or ejectment)  <em><strong>prevail</strong></em>.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>But then Landlord crossed out &quot;<em><strong>prevail</strong></em>&quot;, and is insisting on &quot;<strong>will not be affected</strong>&quot;.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>All existing or future tenant legislation, rights and protection (e.g. against eviction or ejectment) <strong>will not be affected</strong>.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Tenant spoke to Landlord, and four of Landlord's solicitors — (i) an Associate, (ii) Partner, (iii) Head of Real Estate, and (iv) Managing Partner. But they all  politely refused to explain their insistence on &quot;<strong>will not be affected</strong>&quot;.</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Can you explain or speculate Landlord's insistence on &quot;<strong>will not be affected</strong>&quot;?</p>
</li>
<li><p>Can you distinguish   &quot;<em><strong>prevail</strong></em>&quot; vs. &quot;<strong>will not be affected</strong>&quot;? Thanks.</p>
</li>
</ol>

<p>If under current law the landlord has some claim to an exemption from tenant protection laws, using the word &quot;prevail&quot; might suggest that such exemption was being given up or canceled, while the alternate phrasing &quot;will not be affected&quot;. would not imply giving up any such exemption. Otherwise IO can see n difference of effect.</p>

england-and-wales business-lease