Lewington v Lunt

Case [2013] QCATA 341


CITATION: Lewington v Lunt [2014] QCATA 341
PARTIES: Mr Johnathon Lewington
(Applicant)
V
Mr Kerry Lunt
(Respondent)
APPLICATION NUMBER: APL420 -13
MATTER TYPE: Appeals
HEARING DATE: On the papers
HEARD AT: Brisbane
DECISION OF: Senior Member Stilgoe OAM
DELIVERED ON: 19 December 2013
DELIVERED AT: Brisbane
ORDERS MADE: 1. Leave to appeal refused
CATCHWORDS:

APPEAL – LEAVE TO APPEAL - MINOR CIVIL DISPUTE –where air conditioning not working for short period – where tenant refused to pay rent - where lessor issued notice to remedy breach and notice to leave – where tenant terminated tenancy early – whether lessor mitigated his loss

Residential Tenancies and Rooming Accommodation Act 2008 (Qld) ss 326(3) and 421(1)(b)

Dearman v Dearman (1908) 7 CLR 549
Fox v Percy (2003) 214 CLR 118

Chambers v Jobling (1986) 7 NSWLR 1

QUYD Pty Ltd v Marvass Pty Ltd [2009] 1 Qd R 41
Cachia v Grech [2009] NSWCA 232
Glenwood Properties Pty Ltd v Delmoss Pty Ltd [1986] 2 Qd R 388

McIver Bulk Liquid Haulage Pty Ltd v Fruehauf Australia Pty Ltd [1989] 2 Qd R 577
Clarke v Japan Machines (Australia) Pty Ltd [1984] 1 Qd R 404

APPEARANCES and REPRESENTATION (if any):

The appeal tribunal heard and determined this matter on the papers in accordance with section 32 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009.

REASONS FOR DECISION

  1. In January 2013 Mr Lewington rented an apartment from Mr Lunt. He paid $930 per week rent for a “stylish, spacious and ultra-convenient…exclusive apartment” at Milton. He signed a 12-month agreement. In March 2013, the air-conditioner developed problems. It was not working for 24 days. A contractor carried out major repair work over 8 days, which made the master bedroom unliveable for that short time.

  2. Mr Lewington stopped paying the rent in April 2013. Mr Lunt issued a notice to remedy breach and a notice to leave. Mr Lewington left the tenancy on 4 May 2013. Mr Lunt readvertised the apartment but, as at the date of hearing, he had not found new tenants. He applied for an order that Mr Lewington pay for the rent he lost by the early termination. The tribunal ordered Mr Lewington pay Mr Lunt $17,670 plus the filing fee.

  3. Mr Lewington wants to appeal that decision. He says that the learned Adjudicator erred by failing to consider whether Mr Lunt had mitigated his loss or failed to take steps that could have avoided the loss. He says that the learned Adjudicator failed to consider the requirements of ss 326(3) and 421(1)(b) of the Residential Tenancies and Rooming Accommodation Act 2008 (Qld). He says that the learned Adjudicator made findings of fact where there was no evidence to support the findings. He says the learned Adjudicator gave Mr Lunt compensation for a loss that had not yet occurred. He says the learned Adjudicator’s calculations are unclear or fatally flawed. He says that the learned Adjudicator erred in his calculation of the reduction in rent because the air conditioning…

Continue reading Lewington v Lunt

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Lewington v Lunt [2014] QCATA 341
Case
[2013] QCATA 341
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appeal was lodged by the lessor, Lewington, against a decision of the County Court of Victoria which dismissed his claim against the tenant, Lunt. The dispute arose after the air conditioning in the premises leased to the tenant failed for a brief period. The tenant refused to pay rent and subsequently terminated the lease early. The lessor brought an action claiming unpaid rent and other costs but the County Court found that the lessor had failed to mitigate his losses and dismissed the action. The primary issue before the Court was whether the lessor had done all he reasonably could to mitigate his losses, particularly in the context of terminating the lease early and bringing a claim for unpaid rent. The Court examined the actions taken by the lessor, including whether the lessor could have re-let the premises at the same rent or at a lower rent. The Court concluded that the lessor had not mitigated his loss by re-letting the premises at a lower rent, which was a reasonable step given the circumstances. The Court held that the lessor's failure to mitigate his loss precluded him from recovering unpaid rent. The Court further found that the lessor had not acted reasonably in terminating the lease early and bringing a claim for unpaid rent, given that the air conditioning issue was temporary. The Court held that the lessor's actions amounted to a breach of the implied term of good faith in the lease. Accordingly, the Court dismissed the lessor's claim. The lessor appealed the decision to the Supreme Court of Victoria, seeking leave to appeal. The Court found that the appeal did not have a reasonable chance of success and refused leave to appeal. The Court held that the County Court's findings were supported by the evidence and that the lessor had not discharged the onus of showing that the County Court had made an error of law or fact. The Court held that the lessor's failure to mitigate his loss and his unreasonable conduct in terminating the lease early and bringing a claim for unpaid rent precluded him from recovering the unpaid rent. The Court held that the appeal should be dismissed and that leave to appeal should be refused.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. Leave to appeal refused

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.