Amricama Pty Ltd v Red Carpet Real Estate

Amricama Pty Ltd, the appellant, brought an action against Red Carpet Real Estate, the respondent, in the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal (QCAT) seeking a determination of the rent for a renewed lease. The dispute arose after the respondent exercised an option under the lease to renew the tenancy, but the parties disagreed on the rent to be paid under the renewed lease. The appellant sought to rely on sections 27A and 28 of the Retail Shop Leases Act 1994 (Qld), which allow for the determination of market rent before an option to renew and the determination of current market rent by a specialist retail valuer, respectively. The respondent, however, argued that these provisions do not apply to the present case.

The primary issue for the tribunal was whether section 27A of the Retail Shop Leases Act 1994 (Qld) applies to the present case, particularly given that the parties did not agree on a specialist retail valuer as required by section 28 of the Act. The tribunal also needed to determine whether the provisions of section 27A of the Retail Shop Leases Act 1994 (Qld) can be waived by the parties. The tribunal found that the parties had not agreed on a specialist retail valuer and, therefore, section 27A of the Retail Shop Leases Act 1994 (Qld) did not apply to the present case. The tribunal also found that the parties could not waive the provisions of section 27A of the Retail Shop Leases Act 1994 (Qld).

The tribunal dismissed the appellant's application for a determination of the rent for the renewed lease. The tribunal found that the parties had not agreed on a specialist retail valuer and, therefore, section 27A of the Retail Shop Leases Act 1994 (Qld) did not apply to the present case. The tribunal also found that the parties could not waive the provisions of section 27A of the Retail Shop Leases Act 1994 (Qld). The tribunal held that the respondent was not required to provide a lease in registrable form. As a result, the application was dismissed.