Calabro v Beaudoin

This matter concerned an application for leave to appeal to the Full Court of the Supreme Court of South Australia from a decision of the South Australian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (SACAT). The appellant, Mr Calabro, sought to appeal against SACAT’s refusal to grant permission to proceed with an internal review of an earlier decision. The respondent was Mr Beaudoin.

The primary legal issues before the Full Court were whether SACAT had erred in its determination regarding the application of the Residential Tenancies Act 1995 (SA), specifically concerning the "holiday exclusion" provision, and whether the diversity jurisdiction under s 75(iv) of the Commonwealth Constitution was engaged. Mr Calabro also sought an extension of time to file his notice of appeal, citing new evidence, his disability, and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.

The Court dismissed the application for leave to appeal. It held that the duration of the rooming house agreement would, on any view, overcome the presumption against the "holiday exclusion" under s 5(1b) of the Residential Tenancies Act, even if the appellant's asserted facts were established. Furthermore, the Court found that the interests of justice did not warrant allowing Mr Calabro to advance a case based on facts entirely different from those on which his claims were previously prosecuted and determined. The Court also determined that the respondent was not a resident of another State for the purposes of s 75(iv) of the Constitution, meaning the diversity jurisdiction was not engaged and no constitutional issue arose. The Court also noted that the ongoing existence of s 5(1)(c) of the Act was not capable of constituting fresh evidence.