Civil and Administrative Tribunal
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Chen v Metrix Development Pty Ltd [2021] NSWCATCD 87 Hearing dates: On the Papers Date of orders: 12 August 2021 Decision date: 12 August 2021 Jurisdiction: Consumer and Commercial Division Before: G Kinsey, General Member Decision: (1) An oral hearing on costs is dispensed with under s 50(2) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW).
(2) Each party in the proceedings in the Tribunal is to pay the party’s own costs.
(3) The application for costs by the Respondents is dismissed.
Catchwords: COSTS — Whether special circumstances exist pursuant to section 60 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 — No special circumstances exist-application for costs dismissed — No order as to costs
Legislation Cited: Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW)
Civil and Administrative Tribunal Rules 2014 (NSW)
Cases Cited: Allen v TriCare (Hastings) Ltd [2017] NSWCATAP] 25
Nguyen v Perpetual Trustee Company Ltd; Perpetual Trustee Company Ltd v Nguyen[2015] NSWCATAP 264
Texts Cited: Nil
Category: Costs Parties: Hong Yan Chen (First Applicant)
Wei Dong Liang (Second Applicant)
Metrix Development Pty Ltd (First Respondent)
Anthony Metledge (Second Respondent)
Lauren Metledge (Third Respondent)Representation: Solicitors:
Baldock Stacy & Niven Solicitors (Applicants)
Mary Metledge Solicitor (Respondents)
File Number(s): RT 21/14135 Publication restriction: Nil
REASONS FOR DECISION
APPLICATION
-
This is an application for costs by the Respondents (Metrix Development Pty Ltd, Anthony Metledge and Lauren Metledge) following the withdrawal of proceedings in matter RT 21/14135. The Respondents were tenants of a property in Orchards Avenue Breakfast Point (“the Premises”) For the sake of convenience the Respondents shall hereinafter be referred to as “the Tenants”.
-
The Applicants (Hong Yan Chen and Wei Dong Liang) in matter RT 21/14135 were the Landlords of the property. The Landlords filed an application on 29 March 2021 seeking orders for termination of the residential tenancy under section 85 of the Residential Tenancies Act 2010 and payment of the rental bond (“the Application”). For the sake of convenience the Applicants shall hereinafter be referred to as “the Landlords”.
-
On 3 May 2021 the Application was listed for conciliation and directions. At the hearing both parties were given leave to be legally represented and directions were made for the filing and service of evidence.
BACKGROUND
-
It is convenient to set out the history of the tenancy.
-
The Landlords and the Tenants entered into a residential tenancy agreement for the Premises on or about 15 April 2019. The term of the agreement was 12 months commencing on 15 April 2019 and ending on 14 April 2020.
-
At the end of the fixed term the Tenants remained in the Premises.
-
The Landlords served the Tenants with 3 Notices of Termination:
Notice of Termination dated 17 November 2020 under section 85 of the Residential Tenancies Act 2010 (“the Act”). The notice required the Tenants to give vacant possession on 15 February 2021. (“the first NOT”)
Notice of Termination dated 15 January 2021 under section 87 of the Act for…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Chen v Metrix Development Pty Ltd and more:
- Read every judgment in full
- Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
- See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
- Download judgments as PDF or Word
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2021] NSWCATCD 87
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues before the court were primarily concerned with whether special circumstances existed that would justify the awarding of costs under section 60 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW). The court had to determine if there were any exceptional factors that warranted a departure from the general principle that each party bears their own costs. The Respondents argued that such special circumstances did exist, primarily based on the conduct of the Plaintiff during the litigation process.
The court, after a thorough examination of the evidence and arguments presented, concluded that no special circumstances existed to warrant an award of costs to the Respondents. The reasoning provided by the tribunal indicated that while the conduct of the Plaintiff may have been less than ideal, it did not reach the threshold of exceptional circumstances necessary to invoke section 60. Consequently, the application for costs was dismissed, and each party was ordered to bear their own costs. This decision was in line with the general principle that each party is responsible for their own expenses unless specific statutory provisions apply.
Orders
Orders of the court
(1) An oral hearing on costs is dispensed with under s 50(2) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW).
(2) Each party in the proceedings in the Tribunal is to pay the party’s own costs.
(3) The application for costs by the Respondents is dismissed.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.