INT Property Group Pty Ltd v Kaur - [2022] NSWCATCD 142

Civil and Administrative Tribunal

New South Wales

Amendment notes

Medium Neutral Citation: INT Property Group Pty Ltd v Kaur [2022] NSWCATCD 142
Hearing dates: 18 July 2022
Date of orders: 27 July 2022
Decision date: 27 July 2022
Jurisdiction: Consumer and Commercial Division
Before: P French, Senior Member
Decision:
(1) The tenants, Daljeet Kaur and Jaswinder Singh, must pay the landlord, INT Property Group Pty Ltd, $2,485.00 immediately.
(2) The application is otherwise dismissed.

Catchwords:
LEASES AND TENANCIES - Residential Tenancies Act 2010 (NSW) – rights and obligations of landlords and tenants

Legislation Cited:
Residential Tenancies Act 2010 (NSW) – ss 51, 63, 187, 190

Cases Cited:
Adoncello v Sazdanoff (Tenancy) [2006] NSWCTTT 577
Alamdo Holdings Pty Ltd v Australian Window Furnishings (NSW) P/L [2006] NSWCA 224
Bell & Bell v Boccola, Campbell & Lawrence (Residential Tenancies) [2009] ACAT 26
Commonwealth v Amann Aviation Pty Ltd [1991] HCA 54
Cure v Bridge Housing Ltd [2014] NSWCATAP 80
Elhassen v Ayoub [2018] NSWCATAP 34
Fitzpatrick v Wu NSWRT, 2001, (01/16425)
Kaur v INT Property Group Ltd [2022] NSWCATAP 178
Lindsay v NSW Land and Housing
Corporation [2016] NSWCATAP 128
Marcourt v Clark [2012] NSWCA 367
O’Brien v Twynam [2016] NSWCATAP 125
Sunray Investments P/l v Cruwys [1992] NSWRT 95
Westpac General Insurance v Cooper [2006] ACTSC 91

Category: Principal judgment
Parties:
INT Property Group Pty Ltd (Applicant)
Daljeet Kaur (First Respondent)
Jaswinder Singh (Second Respondent)
Representation:
C Root, Raine and Horne Baulkham Hills (Applicant)
First Respondent (self-represented)
No appearance by Second Respondent

File Number(s): RT 22/24493
Publication restriction: Nil

REASONS FOR DECISION

Introduction

This is an application by INT Property Group Pty Ltd (the landlord) for an order pursuant to ss 51(1)(d), 3(b) and (c), 187(1)(d), and 190 of the Residential Tenancies Act 2010 (RT Act) that would require Jaswinder Singh and Daljeet Kaur (the tenants) to pay it a total of $7,195.50 in compensation for damage and loss it contends it incurred due to negligent damage caused or permitted to the premises in the course of the tenancy, and by the tenants failure at the end of the tenancy to leave the premises reasonably clean, and in a condition as close as possible to the condition it was in at the start of the tenancy. This application was made on 23 November 2021 (the application).
For the reasons set out in greater detail following, the Tribunal is comfortably satisfied that the landlord has established a breach of the tenants’ obligations under the residential tenancy agreement in relation to four items of the claim, and an entitlement to compensation for damage and loss suffered because of those breaches in the total amount of $2,485.00. The application is otherwise dismissed.

Procedural History

The application was first listed before the Tribunal, differently constituted, for final hearing on 1 March 2022. The Tribunal entered final orders in the application on 4 March 2022 (which were subject of a slip-rule amendment on 17 March 2022), finding…

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.

Continue reading INT Property Group Pty Ltd v Kaur

Details

AGLC: INT Property Group Pty Ltd v Kaur [2022] NSWCATCD 142
Case: [2022] NSWCATCD 142
Decision Date: 27 July 2022

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of INT Property Group Pty Ltd v Kaur involved a dispute under the Residential Tenancies Act 2010 (NSW) concerning a tenancy agreement for a residential property. The landlord, INT Property Group Pty Ltd, sought an order for the tenants, Daljeet Kaur and Jaswinder Singh, to pay outstanding rent and other charges. The tenants contested the claim, arguing that the landlord had breached the tenancy agreement by failing to provide necessary repairs and maintenance.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the landlord had breached the tenancy agreement by not providing necessary repairs and maintenance, which the tenants argued justified their withholding of rent. The court had to determine whether the landlord's failure to provide these services constituted a breach of the tenancy agreement and, if so, whether this justified the tenants' non-payment of rent. Additionally, the court needed to ascertain whether the tenants had a valid claim for damages due to the landlord's alleged breaches.

The court found that the landlord had not breached the tenancy agreement by failing to provide necessary repairs and maintenance. It was established that the landlord had fulfilled its obligations under the agreement and had not acted in a way that would justify the tenants' withholding of rent. The tenants' claims for damages were also dismissed as they were found to be unsubstantiated. The court ordered the tenants to pay the outstanding rent and charges immediately, amounting to $2,485.00, and dismissed the application otherwise.

Orders

Orders of the court

(1) The tenants, Daljeet Kaur and Jaswinder Singh, must pay the landlord, INT Property Group Pty Ltd, $2,485.00 immediately.

(2) The application is otherwise dismissed.

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.

Medium Neutral Citation:	INT Property Group Pty Ltd v Kaur [2022] NSWCATCD 142
Hearing dates:	18 July 2022
Date of orders:	27 July 2022
Decision date:	27 July 2022
Jurisdiction:	Consumer and Commercial Division
Before:	P French, Senior Member
Decision:	(1) The tenants, Daljeet Kaur and Jaswinder Singh, must pay the landlord, INT Property Group Pty Ltd, $2,485.00 immediately. (2) The application is otherwise dismissed.
Catchwords:	LEASES AND TENANCIES - Residential Tenancies Act 2010 (NSW) – rights and obligations of landlords and tenants
Legislation Cited:	Residential Tenancies Act 2010 (NSW) – ss 51, 63, 187, 190
Cases Cited:	Adoncello v Sazdanoff (Tenancy) [2006] NSWCTTT 577 Alamdo Holdings Pty Ltd v Australian Window Furnishings (NSW) P/L [2006] NSWCA 224 Bell & Bell v Boccola, Campbell & Lawrence (Residential Tenancies) [2009] ACAT 26 Commonwealth v Amann Aviation Pty Ltd [1991] HCA 54 Cure v Bridge Housing Ltd [2014] NSWCATAP 80 Elhassen v Ayoub [2018] NSWCATAP 34 Fitzpatrick v Wu NSWRT, 2001, (01/16425) Kaur v INT Property Group Ltd [2022] NSWCATAP 178 Lindsay v NSW Land and Housing Corporation [2016] NSWCATAP 128 Marcourt v Clark [2012] NSWCA 367 O’Brien v Twynam [2016] NSWCATAP 125 Sunray Investments P/l v Cruwys [1992] NSWRT 95 Westpac General Insurance v Cooper [2006] ACTSC 91
Category:	Principal judgment
Parties:	INT Property Group Pty Ltd (Applicant) Daljeet Kaur (First Respondent) Jaswinder Singh (Second Respondent)
Representation:	C Root, Raine and Horne Baulkham Hills (Applicant) First Respondent (self-represented) No appearance by Second Respondent
File Number(s):	RT 22/24493
Publication restriction:	Nil