Armstrong v Triple One Group Pty Ltd t/a Robert James Realty (No 2)

The appeal tribunal considered an application from a tenant, Armstrong, against Triple One Group Pty Ltd, trading as Robert James Realty, regarding the termination of a lease. Armstrong claimed that a verbal agreement to extend the lease was made, which the tribunal had previously rejected. The tribunal was asked to determine whether there was an error in its findings of fact or law that would warrant leave to appeal or a new trial. The legal issues focused on the tribunal's assessment of the evidence and its conclusions about the existence of a verbal agreement to extend the lease.

The tribunal examined the evidence and concluded that the tenant had not demonstrated any error in the tribunal's findings of fact or law. The tribunal noted that it was not the role of the appellate court to substitute its own findings for those of the tribunal unless there was a clear error. The tribunal found that the evidence did not support the tenant's claim of a verbal agreement to extend the lease. The tribunal also considered whether there were any grounds for alleging that the respondents had misled the tribunal, but found no such evidence. The appeal tribunal held that the tenant had not demonstrated that the tribunal had made an error warranting interference.

The tribunal refused the application for leave to appeal or a new trial, affirming the original decision. The tribunal emphasised the principle that the appellate court should not lightly interfere with the findings of fact made by the tribunal unless there was a clear error. In this case, the tribunal found no such error and upheld the decision that no verbal agreement to extend the lease had been proven. The tribunal's decision was final, and no appeal or new trial was granted.