Is there an immediate vesting of all rights under the lease?

Respondent's argument overlooks the cardinal proposition that there was an immediate vesting of all rights under the lease, for defendant was in possession at the time it was made and it became immediately effective. Defendant thereby acquired a present right to occupancy of all office space then in its possession and a potential occupancy of all other available office space in the building; the right to possession of the additional space immediately vested though the enjoyment of possession was postponed until defendant's requirements should entitle it to possession of additional available space in the building. 'Subject to the possible exception of certain gifts of future interests to a class * * * both the rule against remoteness of vesting and the rule against suspension of the absolute power of alienation are ordinarily inapplicable to vested estates. They apply only to future contingent estates.' (38 Cal.Jur.2d 14, p. 459.) Postponement of possession or enjoyment of an interest that is vested does not bring the rule against perpetuities into operation. 'The rule against perpetuities * * * relates only to vesting and does not apply to vested future estates though possession and enjoyment be postponed indefinitely.' (Caffroy v. Fremlin, 198 Cal.App.2d 176, 181, 17 Cal.Rptr. 668, 671.) See, 70 C.J.S. Perpetuities 7, page 583; Id., 10, page 585.