Faulder v Tran

Case [2018] ACAT 80

ACT CIVIL & ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL



FAULDER v TRAN (Appeal) [2018] ACAT 80

AA 6/2018

Catchwords:              APPEAL – RESIDENTIAL TENANCIES – terminated lease – former tenant sought compensation – alleged failure by lessor to maintain subject premises in reasonable state of repair – alleged delay in making repairs as required – whether specific work to be done related to state of repair of premises at commencement of tenancy or maintenance of premises during tenancy – operation of standard residential tenancy terms 54, 55. 57 and 59 – appropriate amounts of compensation – whether tenant should be awarded filing fees for original proceeding and appeal

Legislation cited:      ACT Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2008 ss 7, 48, 82

Limitation Act 1985 s 11

Residential Tenancies Act 1997 ss 8, 9, 10, 38, 71, 83 standard terms 3, 21-23A, 52, 54, 55, 57, 59

Cases cited: Applicant WAEE v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCAFC 184

Australian Postal Corporation v Hughes [2009] FCA 1057
Bangura & Fan [2013] ACAT 38
Brogan Prestige Properties v Strand & Black [2010] ACAT 60

But v Baldwin [2016] ACAT 9
Byrnes v Jokona Pty Ltd [2002] FCA 41

Constanzo Laria v Watson [2010] ACAT 79
Faulder v Tran [2018] ACAT 2

Irena Peters v Commissioner for Housing in the ACT [2006] ACTRTT 6

Lee v Guo [2017] ACAT 60
Manour v Dangar [2017] ACAT 49
May v Medanic [2011] NSWCTTT 17
Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs v Yusuf [2001] HCA 30
Northern Sandblasting Pty Ltd v Harris (1997) 188 CLR 313
O’Brien v Dunsdon (1965-66) 39 ALJR 78
Saleem & Gizgeez v Abeygunaskara & Jeevanthan [2011] ACAT 9
Watson v Gaudion [2009] ACAT 15
Wolfe v Albekka [2011] ACAT 22
Worrall v Commissioner for Housing for the Australian Capital Territory [2002] FCAFC 127

Textbook cited:        A Anforth, P Christensen, C Adkins, Residential Tenancies Law and Practice New South Wales (7th ed, The Federation Press, 2017)

Tribunal:                   President G Neate AM
  Senior Member A Anforth

Date of Orders:  21 August 2018

Date of Reasons for Decision:         21 August 2018

AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY             )

CIVIL & ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL           )          AA 6/2018

BETWEEN:

CHARLIE FAULDER

Applicant

AND:

VINCENT TRAN

Respondent

TRIBUNAL:             President G Neate AM
  Senior Member A Anforth

DATE:21 August 2018

ORDER

The Tribunal orders that:

1.The appeal be allowed in part.

2.The orders of the Tribunal dated 9 January 2018 be set aside.

3.Within 28 days from the date of this order, the Respondent pay the Appellant $1,692.50 comprised of:

(a)        cleaning $175.00
(b)        broken blind $61.50
(c)        alarm system $168.00
(d)        security key $70.00
(e)        ducted vacuum system $40.00
(f)         heating system $368.00
(g)        general inconvenience $200.00
(h)        original filing fee $72.00
(i)         appeal filing fee $538.00

………………………………..

President G Neate AM

For and on behalf of the Tribunal

REASONS FOR DECISION

Introduction

1.On 9 January 2018, a presidential member of the ACT Civil and Administrative Tribunal (the Original Tribunal) ordered Vincent Tran (the Respondent), the…

Continue reading Faulder v Tran

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Faulder v Tran [2018] ACAT 80
Case
[2018] ACAT 80
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Faulder v Tran was heard before the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. The dispute involved a tenant, the Appellant, who was appealing against a decision of the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) concerning a claim for compensation for damage to the rental property caused by the tenant's former partner. The Tribunal was required to determine the appropriate compensation for specific items of damage and inconvenience.

The primary legal issues before the Tribunal were the quantification of damages and the proper allocation of costs. The Tribunal had to consider the evidence presented regarding the costs of repairing or replacing the damaged items and the reasonableness of the general inconvenience compensation. Additionally, the Tribunal needed to address the issue of the allocation of costs between the parties, including the costs of the original VCAT proceeding and the appeal before the Tribunal.

The Tribunal found that the Appellant was entitled to compensation for certain items of damage and inconvenience. The Tribunal allowed the appeal in part, setting aside the orders of the Tribunal dated 9 January 2018. The Tribunal determined that the Respondent should pay the Appellant a total of $1,692.50, broken down into specific categories including cleaning, broken blinds, an alarm system, a security key, a ducted vacuum system, a heating system, general inconvenience, and the costs of the original and appeal filing fees. This decision was based on the evidence provided and the Tribunal's assessment of the reasonableness of the claimed amounts.

Orders

Orders of the court

The Tribunal orders that:

1. The appeal be allowed in part.

2. The orders of the Tribunal dated 9 January 2018 be set aside.

3. Within 28 days from the date of this order, the Respondent pay the Appellant $1,692.50 comprised of:

(a) cleaning

$175.00

(b) broken blind

$61.50

(c) alarm system

$168.00

(d) security key

$70.00

(e) ducted vacuum system

$40.00

(f) heating system

$368.00

(g) general inconvenience

$200.00

(h) original filing fee

$72.00

(i) appeal filing fee

$538.00

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.