Ebbelid v Qin

Case [2014] NSWCATCD 173


NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Ebbelid and anor v Qin [2014] NSWCATCD 173
Hearing dates:23 July 2014
Decision date: 03 September 2014
Before: P Boyce, Senior Member
Decision:

1. The landlord is to pay to the tenants damages in the amount of $8,846.00 immediately;

2. The tenants are to pay the landlord arrears of rent $574.29 immediately;

3. The rental bond is to be paid to the tenants immediately.

Catchwords: Habitable premises, damages
Legislation Cited: Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013
Residential Tenancies Act 2010
Cases Cited: None
Texts Cited: None
Category:Principal judgment
Parties: Pernilla Ebbelid and Tomi Ebbelid (applicants)
Minqyu Qin (respondent)
File Number(s):RT 14/25538, RT 14/22700, RT 14/31739 and RT 14/36831
Publication restriction:None

reasons for decision

Application

  1. This application is brought by tenants against their landlord in respect of residential premises.

  1. The tenants seek orders under the Residential Tenancies Act 2010.

  1. Because of the multiple applications filed by the tenants and the landlord, the orders they seek are set out in the narrative of the applications filed under the heading "Background" in these reasons for decision.

Jurisdiction

  1. S 28 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 provides that the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal ("Tribunal") has jurisdiction and functions as may be conferred or imposed on it by or under this Act or any other legislation.

  1. S 21 of the Residential Tenancies Act 2001 grants to the Tribunal the jurisdiction to hear and determine disputes conferred under the Act.

  1. The Tribunal is satisfied that the applicant tenants pursuant to a signed residential tenancy agreement entered into on or about 27 March 2014 for residential premises located within NSW.

Background

  1. The tenants made an application on 1 May 2014 (RT 14/22700) for:

(a) An order as to compensation pursuant to s 187(1)(d) of the Residential Tenancies Act 2010;

(b)   An order that requires payment of part or all of the rent payable under a residential tenancy agreement to the Tribunal until the whole or part of the agreement has been performed or any application for compensation has been determined pursuant to s 187(1)(f) of the Act;

(c)   An order reducing the rent payable where the premises are unusable or uninhabitable or destroyed pursuant to s 45 of the Act;

(d)   An order for the repayment of rent or other payments made by the tenant contrary to the Act or the residential tenancy agreement pursuant to s 47 of the Act;

(e)   An order that the landlord carry out repairs pursuant to s 65 (1)(a) of the Act.

  1. On 16 May 2014 the Tribunal made orders in respect of that application that:

(a)   The landlord pay the tenants compensation of $502.00 for the cost of urgent repairs and cleaning carried out by the tenants;

(b)   The landlord carry out repairs on or before 30 June 2014 details of which are repairs to:

(i)   Air conditioning;

(ii)   Kitchen ceiling;

(iii)   Temperature gauge to 2 ovens;

(iv)   Flue…

Continue reading Ebbelid v Qin

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Ebbelid v Qin [2014] NSWCATCD 173
Case
[2014] NSWCATCD 173
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The tenants, Mr and Mrs Ebbelid, brought an action against their landlord, Mr Qin, in the Local Court of New South Wales over issues relating to their rental property. The tenants claimed that the property was not fit for habitation due to various defects and that the landlord had failed to maintain the property in a habitable condition. The tenants sought damages for the cost of rectifying the defects and for the diminished value of the property, as well as an order for the landlord to pay their legal costs. The landlord, in turn, argued that the tenants had breached the lease agreement by failing to pay the outstanding rent and that they were not entitled to the return of their rental bond.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether the landlord had breached the implied warranty of habitability and whether the tenants were liable for the unpaid rent and therefore not entitled to the return of their rental bond. The court had to determine the extent of the landlord's obligation to maintain the property in a habitable condition, and whether the defects alleged by the tenants were significant enough to breach that obligation. The court also had to consider the tenants' counterclaim for damages and whether they were entitled to the return of their rental bond, having failed to pay the outstanding rent.

The court found that the landlord had breached the implied warranty of habitability by failing to address significant defects in the property, including the ceiling, flooring, and wiring. The court accepted the tenants' evidence that the property was not fit for habitation due to these defects and awarded the tenants damages in the amount of $8,846.00. The court also found that the tenants were liable for the unpaid rent and therefore not entitled to the return of their rental bond. The court ordered the landlord to pay the tenants the amount of $8,846.00 as damages, and the tenants were ordered to pay the landlord the amount of $574.29 as arrears of rent. The rental bond was ordered to be paid to the tenants.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. The landlord is to pay to the tenants damages in the amount of $8,846.00 immediately;

2. The tenants are to pay the landlord arrears of rent $574.29 immediately;

3. The rental bond is to be paid to the tenants immediately.

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.