This dispute is something that really intrigues me, given that I am generally referred to as a bloodsucker, leech, maggot, scum, ambulance chaser...yes, I am a lawyer. Admittedly, I practice in Australia so the laws regarding leases/renewal of leases would obviously be different, but the basic concepts are quite similar.
The fact that PCMR missed out on renewing their lease is pretty ridiculous on their part. If you run a multi million dollar company, yet you cannot manage to lodge a simple, one page document to the lessor, well, then I worry about what else you are forgetting.
That said, I don't understand the rationale behind Vail's refusal to grant the renewal of lease based on the existing relationship. I am also surprised the court did not grant an automatic renewal based on past conduct, but I suppose that is one of the differences in the laws between the two countries. That said, the best tenant a land lord can have is one that pays the rent. At the moment, Vail is paying legal fees, along with any other fees in relation to the land, for an end that seems somewhat unclear. Surely, Vail would be best suited to either negotiate a new deal which increases the rent price or just offer to buy the land at the bottom of the hill.
Interesting stuff, can't wait to see what happens