Commonwealth of Australia (As Represented BY the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development) v Kenney

The Commonwealth of Australia, represented by the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development, brought proceedings against Mr. and Mrs. Kenney concerning a periodic tenancy agreement for premises at 140-142 Pitt Street, Sydney. The Commonwealth sought to terminate this agreement and obtain vacant possession of the premises. The matter was heard by Judge Smith in the Supreme Court of New South Wales.

The central legal issues before the Court were whether the Commonwealth was entitled to terminate the periodic tenancy agreement under section 85 of the *Residential Tenancies Act 2010* (NSW), and whether the proceedings had been properly constituted. The Commonwealth contended that the premises were predominantly used for Commonwealth purposes, which, under section 85, permits termination of a tenancy agreement even if the tenant has been in possession for less than 20 years. The respondents argued that the termination was invalid.

Judge Smith found that the Commonwealth had established that the predominant use of the premises was for Commonwealth purposes. Applying section 85 of the *Residential Tenancies Act 2010* (NSW), the Court determined that this predominant use justified the termination of the tenancy agreement. The Court also found that the proceedings were properly constituted.

Consequently, the Court granted the termination of the tenancy agreement and ordered that the respondents provide vacant possession of the premises. However, the order for vacant possession was suspended for a period of 60 days to allow the respondents time to vacate.