Curtin v Meadlow Holdings Pty Ltd - [2001] QCA 145

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION: Curtin v Meadlow Holdings P/L [2001] QCA 145

PARTIES: RUSSELL BERNARD CURTIN
(appellant/appellant)
v
MEADLOW HOLDINGS PTY LTD ACN 009 746 696
(respondent/respondent)

FILE NO/S: Appeal No 4907 of 2000
DC No 2822 of 1999

DIVISION: Court of Appeal

PROCEEDING: General Civil Appeal

ORIGINATING COURT:
District Court at Brisbane

DELIVERED ON: 20 April 2001

DELIVERED AT: Brisbane

HEARING DATE: 27 March 2001

JUDGES: Thomas JA, Byrne and Dutney JJ
Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, each concurring as to the orders made

ORDER:
1.            Appeal from decision of the District Court at Brisbane dated 9 May 2000 allowed with costs including costs of the application for leave to appeal;

2.            Set aside order of the District Court dated 9 May 2000 and in its place substitute an order that the appeal be allowed with costs; order that the decision of the Magistrates Court held at Petrie in Plaint No 970826 be set aside and replaced with a judgment against the defendant for $3919-52; further order that the respondent Meadlow Holdings Pty Ltd pay the appellant his costs of and incidental to that appeal;

3.            Liberty to apply.

CATCHWORDS:
LANDLORD AND TENANT – RIGHTS AND LIABILITIES – FORM AND CONTENTS OF LEASE – TERMINATION OF TENANCY – lease of premises terminated for failure to pay rent – where clause in lease gave lessee 7 days after determination of lease to remove any ‘moveable fixtures fittings and furnishings’ – where lessor changed locks – where various items of property left on premises by lessee after expiration of 7 day period – where lessor retook possession and dealt with goods

TROVER AND DETINUE – ACTION FOR CONVERSION – where lessee made counterclaim alleging conversion of items of property left on premises by lessor

TROVER AND DETINUE – ACTION FOR CONVERSION DAMAGES – VALUE AT TIME OF CONVERSION –where respondent valuer adopted minimum value of goods – where this did not reflect market value approach

REAL PROPERTY – FIXTURES – WHAT ARE FIXTURES – DEALING WITH AND AFFECTING FIXTURES – BETWEEN LANDLORD AND TENANT – whether various items of property left on premises ‘fixtures fittings and furnishings’ – construction of clause – interpretation of terms – whether items fixtures – whether they became property of lessor

BAILMENTS – DUTIES AND LIABILITIES OF BAILEEE – NEGLIGENCE – GRATUITOUS BAILMENT – where lessor in control of premises and contents – where damage caused to goods

Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld), Rule 184

City West Centre Pty Ltd v Galaxy Media Pty Ltd (1998) 9 BPR 16, 313, considered
Dean v J Thomas & Son [1981] Qd R 62, considered
GM & MY Campbell & Co Pty Ltd v Cotton [1992] ANZ Conv R 610, considered
Jigrose v Drummond [1994] ANZ Conv R 212, considered
Kosciusko Thredbo Pty Ltd v FCT (1987) 87 ATC 5118, considered
McMahon’s Transport Pty Ltd v Ebbage [1991] 1 Qd R 185, distinguished
Ocean Line v Macquarie Bank CA No 6935…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Curtin v Meadlow Holdings 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

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2001] QCA 145
Decision Date: 20 April 2001

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Curtin v Meadlow Holdings Pty Ltd involved a dispute between a tenant, Curtin, and his former landlord, Meadlow Holdings Pty Ltd. Curtin had leased premises from Meadlow but the lease was terminated due to Curtin's failure to pay rent. The lease contained a clause that allowed Curtin seven days to remove any "moveable fixtures, fittings and furnishings" after the lease ended. Upon expiration of this period, Meadlow changed the locks and took possession of the premises, subsequently dealing with the items left behind.

The central legal issues were whether the items left behind by Curtin were indeed "moveable fixtures, fittings and furnishings" as defined in the lease, and if they became the property of Meadlow. Additionally, Curtin argued that Meadlow had converted his property by failing to properly care for the items left on the premises and by causing damage to them. Curtin made a counterclaim for conversion, and the dispute over damages included the appropriate valuation of the goods.

The court found that Curtin's items were not "moveable fixtures, fittings and furnishings" as they were not permanently attached to the premises and were not intended to be left behind. Consequently, these items did not become the property of Meadlow upon termination of the lease. Furthermore, the court held that Meadlow had not acted negligently in their care of Curtin's property and did not owe a duty of care to Curtin. The court also determined that the valuation of the goods should reflect the market value approach rather than the minimum value adopted by Meadlow's valuer. As a result, Curtin was awarded damages of $3,919.52.

The court allowed the appeal from the District Court, set aside the previous order, and substituted it with an order allowing Curtin's appeal and awarding him damages and costs. Meadlow was ordered to pay Curtin's costs of the appeal.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. Appeal from decision of the District Court at Brisbane dated 9 May 2000 allowed with costs including costs of the application for leave to appeal;

2. Set aside order of the District Court dated 9 May 2000 and in its place substitute an order that the appeal be allowed with costs; order that the decision of the Magistrates Court held at Petrie in Plaint No 970826 be set aside and replaced with a judgment against the defendant for $3919-52; further order that the respondent Meadlow Holdings Pty Ltd pay the appellant his costs of and incidental to that appeal;

3. Liberty to apply.

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.

CITATION:	Curtin v Meadlow Holdings P/L [2001] QCA 145
PARTIES:	RUSSELL BERNARD CURTIN (appellant/appellant) v MEADLOW HOLDINGS PTY LTD ACN 009 746 696 (respondent/respondent)
FILE NO/S:	Appeal No 4907 of 2000 DC No 2822 of 1999
DIVISION:	Court of Appeal
PROCEEDING:	General Civil Appeal
ORIGINATING COURT:	District Court at Brisbane
DELIVERED ON:	20 April 2001
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
HEARING DATE:	27 March 2001
JUDGES:	Thomas JA, Byrne and Dutney JJ Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, each concurring as to the orders made
ORDER:	1. Appeal from decision of the District Court at Brisbane dated 9 May 2000 allowed with costs including costs of the application for leave to appeal; 2. Set aside order of the District Court dated 9 May 2000 and in its place substitute an order that the appeal be allowed with costs; order that the decision of the Magistrates Court held at Petrie in Plaint No 970826 be set aside and replaced with a judgment against the defendant for $3919-52; further order that the respondent Meadlow Holdings Pty Ltd pay the appellant his costs of and incidental to that appeal; 3. Liberty to apply.
CATCHWORDS:	LANDLORD AND TENANT – RIGHTS AND LIABILITIES – FORM AND CONTENTS OF LEASE – TERMINATION OF TENANCY – lease of premises terminated for failure to pay rent – where clause in lease gave lessee 7 days after determination of lease to remove any ‘moveable fixtures fittings and furnishings’ – where lessor changed locks – where various items of property left on premises by lessee after expiration of 7 day period – where lessor retook possession and dealt with goods TROVER AND DETINUE – ACTION FOR CONVERSION – where lessee made counterclaim alleging conversion of items of property left on premises by lessor TROVER AND DETINUE – ACTION FOR CONVERSION DAMAGES – VALUE AT TIME OF CONVERSION –where respondent valuer adopted minimum value of goods – where this did not reflect market value approach REAL PROPERTY – FIXTURES – WHAT ARE FIXTURES – DEALING WITH AND AFFECTING FIXTURES – BETWEEN LANDLORD AND TENANT – whether various items of property left on premises ‘fixtures fittings and furnishings’ – construction of clause – interpretation of terms – whether items fixtures – whether they became property of lessor BAILMENTS – DUTIES AND LIABILITIES OF BAILEEE – NEGLIGENCE – GRATUITOUS BAILMENT – where lessor in control of premises and contents – where damage caused to goods Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld), Rule 184 City West Centre Pty Ltd v Galaxy Media Pty Ltd (1998) 9 BPR 16, 313, considered Dean v J Thomas & Son [1981] Qd R 62, considered GM & MY Campbell & Co Pty Ltd v Cotton [1992] ANZ Conv R 610, considered Jigrose v Drummond [1994] ANZ Conv R 212, considered Kosciusko Thredbo Pty Ltd v FCT (1987) 87 ATC 5118, considered McMahon’s Transport Pty Ltd v Ebbage [1991] 1 Qd R 185, distinguished Ocean Line v Macquarie Bank CA No 6935…