Civil and Administrative Tribunal
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Fitzharris v Llic [2019] NSWCATCD 81 Hearing dates: 13 May 2019 Date of orders: 24 June 2019 - Amended 7 August 2019 Decision date: 24 June 2019 Jurisdiction: Consumer and Commercial Division Before: S Daly, General Member Decision: The orders sent to you have been amended under Section 63 of the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 and should read as follows:
The Respondents, Dragoslav & Natasha Llic to pay the Applicant, Katherine Fitzharris the sum of $7325.04 within 28 days of the date of these orders.
Catchwords: RESIDENTIAL TENANCY - Residential Tenancy Agreement - Termination - Landlord's statutory obligations - Reasonable state of cleanliness - Breach of Landlord
Legislation Cited: Residential Tenancies Act 2010 (NSW)
Cases Cited: Bhandrari v Laming [2015] NSWCATAP 224
Proudfoot v Hart (1890) 25 QBD 420
Menashi v Ly [1997] NSWRT 162
Raats v Zein [2016] NSWCATCD 62
De Soleil v Palmhide Pty Ltd [2010] NSWCTTT 464;
Fairly v Stadlmann [2005] NSWCTTT 482
Kuek vBettrfielf [2004] NSWCTTT 210
Lewin v Zhou [2018] NSWCATD 54
Raats v Zein [2016] NSWCARCD 62
Bartley and Zawiolkowski v Harris Park Holdings Pty Ltd [2010] NSWCTTT 592
Stuart v Colley [2004] NSWCTTT 179
Roberts v Bell [2001] NSWRT 6
Category: Principal judgment Parties: Katherine Fitzharris (Applicant)
Dragoslav & Natasha Llic (Respondents)Representation: Applicant (self-represented)
Georgia Tassis (for the respondent)
File Number(s): RT 19/09588 Publication restriction: Nil
REASONS FOR DECISION
Factual Background
-
The Applicant, tenant entered into a Residential Tenancy Agreement with the Respondents, landlords on 31 January 2019. The term of the Agreement was 52 weeks and covered the period 1 February 2019 – 30 January 2010. The property was in Sandringham, NSW. Prior to signing the Agreement, the Applicant paid a holding deposit. At the time of signing, the Applicant paid a bond equalling 2 weeks rent. The rent payable was $520 per week.
-
Prior to signing the Agreement the Applicant says she inspected the property. Pm 17 January 2019 at about 4.30pm. The Applicant says that there was a tenant living there, the property was full of the tenant's belongings and there were boxes everywhere on the floor. The Applicant says that the agent told her that the property was very messy but that it would be professionally cleaned, carpets would be cleaned and things would be sorted before the Applicant moved in.
-
The Applicant received a complete set of keys after 6pm on 31 January and a copy of a condition report for her to complete within 7 days.
-
She went to the property after 6pm, inspected it and sent an email to the agent of the Respondents expressing concerns about the state of the property as follows:
"Hi Georgia,
Firstly thanks for calling in with the right key in the arvo, at least we got in and didn’t have to call a locksmith. You were very professional and easy to deal with lease etc so thanks. I was keen to get back and…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Fitzharris v Llic 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
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2019] NSWCATCD 81
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issues the Tribunal needed to address were whether the Respondents breached the statutory obligation to keep the property in a reasonable state of cleanliness, and if so, whether this breach justified the Applicant's termination of the lease and her claim for compensation. The Tribunal examined the evidence provided regarding the condition of the property and the Respondents' maintenance practices, as well as the legal standards for cleanliness in rental properties. The Applicant argued that the property was in an unsanitary condition, which constituted a breach of the statutory duty, while the Respondents contended that they had fulfilled their obligations and that the Applicant's claims were exaggerated.
After reviewing the evidence and the applicable law, the Tribunal concluded that the Respondents did indeed breach their statutory obligation to maintain the property in a reasonable state of cleanliness. The Tribunal found that the unsanitary conditions observed in the property constituted a significant departure from what is considered reasonable. Consequently, the Tribunal determined that the Applicant was justified in terminating the lease and was entitled to compensation for the breaches. The Tribunal ordered the Respondents to pay the Applicant the sum of $7325.04 within 28 days of the date of the orders.
Orders
Orders of the court
The orders sent to you have been amended under Section 63 of the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 and should read as follows:
The Respondents, Dragoslav & Natasha Llic to pay the Applicant, Katherine Fitzharris the sum of $7325.04 within 28 days of the date of these orders.
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.