An apartment owner and a tenant signed a lease agreement, under which a security check was deposited and it was stipulated that the tenant must pay a penalty if it does not find an alternate tenant in the event of an early departure. The tenant left the apartment mid-lease and did not find an alternate tenant. The lease agreement explicitly stated that the Rental and Loan Law would not apply to the engagement between the parties.
The Court held that the landlord could deposit only the checks for rent and the breach of the obligation to find an alternate tenant. In residential leases, there are statutory provisions that cannot be conditioned upon, except in favor of the tenant. Therefore, a clause in a lease agreement stating that the law does not apply is void. The law establishes strict conditions under which a lessor is permitted to realize a guarantee. A security check provided within a lease agreement is intended to secure the fulfillment of the tenant's obligations and may not be used unless it is proven that the obligations for which it was provided were breached, and to the extent of the breach actually proven. Here, the tenant left the apartment without finding an alternate tenant and did not pay rent until the end of the period. The landlord moved into the apartment instead of the tenant, submitted an appraiser's opinion regarding the alleged damages two years after the tenant vacated the apartment, and did not present documents evidencing electricity and water debts. Consequently, the tenant was ordered to pay only the rent and an agreed penalty for failing to find an alternate tenant as required by the contract.