Boz v Dadoun

[2007] NSWADT 113

CITATION:	Boz v Dadoun & anor [2007] NSWADT 113
DIVISION:	Retail Leases Division
PARTIES:	APPLICANT Nizam Boz RESPONDENT Ahmed Dadoun & Basan Dadoun
FILE NUMBER:	065203
HEARING DATES:	On the papers
SUBMISSIONS CLOSED:	27 February 2007
DATE OF DECISION:	28 May 2007
BEFORE:	Higgins S - Judicial Member
CATCHWORDS:	Claim for payment of money
MATTER FOR DECISION:	Principal matter
LEGISLATION CITED:	Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997 Retail Leases Act 1994
CASES CITED:	Lauven Pty Ltd & Anor v Venus Adult Book Shops Pty Ltd & Ors [2006] NSWADT 359 Tringas v Quach [2007] NSWADT 24
REPRESENTATION:	APPLICANT In person RESPONDENT No appearance
ORDERS:	The respondents to pay the applicant a sum of $713.00

Background

1 The applicant, Nizam Boz, is the owner of Shop 2, 184-186 Halden Street, Lakemba. On 7 February 2005, the applicant entered into a 2 year lease with Ahmed Dadoun and Basan Dadoun (the respondents). The lease agreement contained an option to renew for a further 2 years. It would appear that a dispute arose in regard to the lease and on 11 April 2006, the applicant and the respondents settled the dispute by entering into a written agreement following a mediation at the Retail Tenancy Unit. The applicant asserts that the respondents have failed to fully comply with the terms of the agreement and he has initiated these proceedings in order to have the agreement enforced in full.

2 In his application the applicant seeks the following orders pursuant to s.72 of the Retail Leases Act 1994 (‘the Act’):

(a) Removal of the billiard and amusement tables (10) left behind or $2,000.00 for the cost of removing them;

(b) $713.00 unpaid money.

3 The applicant filed his application with the tribunal on 8 December 2006. The tribunal wrote to the applicant and the respondents on 8 December advising the parties that the matter had been set down for directions on 18 January 2007 at 10.30 am.

4 On 18 January 2007, the applicant appeared in person and there was no appearance by the respondents. At this directions hearing the applicant indicated that he thought the respondents were unlikely to participate in the proceedings. According to a note made by the tribunal, the applicant informed the tribunal that the premises, the subject of the lease, was a barber’s shop and that the tenants had left the shop in May 2006 and had left their belongings behind. At this directions hearing the tribunal ordered the applicant to file and serve a copy of the lease, the affidavits and statements on which he relied and an affidavit of proof of service of his application and the evidence on which he would rely by 2 February 2007. The matter was then adjourned for further directions on 7 February 2007 at 12 noon. On 22 January 2007, the Registry of the tribunal wrote to the respondent’s informing them of the orders that had been made. That letter was addressed to the respondents at 1 Fuller Street Chester Hill.

5 On…