COMMISSIONER for SOCIAL HOUSING in the ACT & URSINO (Residential Tenancies)

The case involves the Commissioner for Social Housing in the ACT as the lessor and Roy Anthony Ursino as the tenant, with the dispute centering on the termination of a residential tenancy agreement and possession of the premises at Unit 19, 41 Brigalow Court, O’Connor, ACT. The ACT Civil & Administrative Tribunal was tasked with deciding whether the tenancy should be terminated and possession granted to the Commissioner, and if so, under what conditions. The legal issues before the Tribunal included whether the tenant had breached the residential tenancy agreement and if the breach warranted termination of the tenancy.

The Tribunal found that the tenant had indeed breached the terms of the residential tenancy agreement. This conclusion was based on the tenant's history of aggressive behavior, which was well-documented through complaints and the tenant's own admissions. Notably, the tenant had pleaded guilty to charges of common assault and criminal damage, for which he was sentenced to 80 hours of community service and a fine of $450. The Tribunal accepted the Commissioner's evidence that the tenant's behavior constituted a serious breach of the tenancy agreement, justifying the termination of the tenancy under Section 48(1)(b) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1997. The Tribunal also declined to exercise its discretion under Section 48(2)(a)(ii) of the Act, which would have allowed the tenant to remedy the breach, given the tenant's history and the recency of the breach.

The Tribunal ordered the unconditional termination of the tenancy agreement and possession of the premises, with certain conditions and a suspension of the order to allow for potential appeal. The tenant was also ordered to comply with specific clauses of the tenancy agreement, vacate the premises, and pay an occupancy fee equivalent to the rent until the date of possession. The orders reflect the Tribunal's consideration of the tenant's history of disruptive and aggressive behavior, the seriousness of the breach, and the impact on other residents in the complex.