Boscolo v Consumer Trader and Tenancy Tribunal

The respondents, Boscolo, sought a stay of the orders made by the Consumer Trader and Tenancy Tribunal (CTTT) in relation to their residential tenancy agreement, which had expired. The landlords, the applicants, sought possession of the property due to significant rental arrears and the tenants' failure to find alternative accommodation for at least ten months. The Supreme Court was called upon to decide whether to grant a stay of the CTTT's orders pending the hearing of an appeal against the Supreme Court's earlier decision not to quash those orders.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the grant of a stay of execution of an order pending the hearing for leave to appeal or of an appeal was a discretionary grant of relief. Additionally, the court had to determine if it was in the interests of justice for the stay to be granted. The respondents argued that they had been on notice to find alternative accommodation for at least ten months and had failed to do so, which should be considered in the context of the stay application. The applicants, on the other hand, contended that the stay should not be granted as the grounds of appeal did not appear to be of substance or likely to succeed.

The court found that the grant of a stay of execution of an order pending the hearing for leave to appeal or of an appeal was indeed a discretionary grant of relief. It was not in the interests of justice for the stay to be granted in this instance, as the respondents had been on notice to find alternative accommodation for a considerable period and had failed to do so. The court was unpersuaded that the grounds of appeal were of substance or likely to succeed, and thus, the stay was refused.

No final orders were made in this decision, as it was a determination on the application for a stay pending appeal. The parties were left to pursue their appeal in the Supreme Court as per the usual course of procedure.