AYOUBI & TAWAKOL

In the matter of *Ayoubi & Tawakol*, heard before Macmillan J, the dispute concerned an application for an order for possession of a property located at 123 Main Street, Sydney. The applicants, Ayoubi and Tawakol, sought to recover possession from the respondent, who had occupied the property under a residential tenancy agreement. The core of the disagreement revolved around the validity of the notice to terminate the tenancy and the respondent's continued occupation of the premises.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether the notice to terminate the residential tenancy agreement was validly served in accordance with the *Residential Tenancies Act 2010* (NSW), and consequently, whether the applicants were entitled to an order for possession of the property. The court was required to interpret the provisions of the Act relating to the form and service of termination notices.

Macmillan J considered the evidence presented by both parties regarding the service of the notice. The court applied the principles of statutory interpretation to the relevant sections of the *Residential Tenancies Act 2010* (NSW), focusing on the requirements for a valid notice to terminate a residential tenancy. His Honour found that the notice served did not comply with the statutory requirements, specifically in relation to the particulars it was required to contain. As a result, the notice was deemed invalid, and the tenancy had not been validly terminated.

Consequently, the court dismissed the application for an order for possession.