Markham Real Estate Partners (KSW) Pty Ltd v Misan
Case
•
[2022] NSWSC 733
•03 June 2022
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Markham Real Estate Partners (KSW) Pty Ltd v Misan [2022] NSWSC 733
[2022] NSWSC 733
03 June 2022
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The case of Markham Real Estate Partners (KSW) Pty Ltd v Misan involved a dispute between a landlord and a tenant regarding the unlawful re-entry into possession of a retail tenancy. The matter was heard by the Supreme Court of Queensland. The central issue was whether the landlord had unlawfully re-entered the property, and if so, whether this affected the enforceability of a guarantee and indemnity agreement under a sub-lease.
The court considered several legal questions, including whether the tenant had repudiated the lease, whether the changing of locks constituted re-entry and taking possession, and whether the administrator of the tenant company had given written consent to the landlord exercising property rights under the Corporations Act. The court found that the landlord lawfully terminated the lease due to the tenant's repudiation and fundamental breach, and that the changing of locks did not constitute an unlawful re-entry.
In addressing the guarantee and indemnity, the court examined whether it was discharged by the alleged unlawful re-entry or by the splitting of debts upon the assignment of the lease and guarantee. The court held that the landlord was entitled to recover unpaid rent, loss of bargain damages, and other losses under the terms of the guarantee and indemnity in the sub-lease. The court found that the guarantee and indemnity were not discharged by the landlord's lawful termination of the lease.
The court ordered that the guarantor was liable for the amounts claimed by the landlord under the guarantee and indemnity, including unpaid rent, loss of bargain damages, and other losses. The court further directed that the guarantor pay the landlord's costs of the proceeding.
The court considered several legal questions, including whether the tenant had repudiated the lease, whether the changing of locks constituted re-entry and taking possession, and whether the administrator of the tenant company had given written consent to the landlord exercising property rights under the Corporations Act. The court found that the landlord lawfully terminated the lease due to the tenant's repudiation and fundamental breach, and that the changing of locks did not constitute an unlawful re-entry.
In addressing the guarantee and indemnity, the court examined whether it was discharged by the alleged unlawful re-entry or by the splitting of debts upon the assignment of the lease and guarantee. The court held that the landlord was entitled to recover unpaid rent, loss of bargain damages, and other losses under the terms of the guarantee and indemnity in the sub-lease. The court found that the guarantee and indemnity were not discharged by the landlord's lawful termination of the lease.
The court ordered that the guarantor was liable for the amounts claimed by the landlord under the guarantee and indemnity, including unpaid rent, loss of bargain damages, and other losses. The court further directed that the guarantor pay the landlord's costs of the proceeding.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Property Law
Legal Concepts
-
Leases and Tenancies
-
Breach of Contract
-
Compensatory Damages
-
Guarantee and Indemnity
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
Re Alliance Paper Pty Ltd [2024] VSC 457
Cases Citing This Decision
14
Misan v Markham Real Estate Partners (KSW) Pty Ltd
[2023] NSWCA 51
Misan v Markham Real Estate Partners (KSW) Pty Ltd (No 2)
[2022] NSWCA 155
Misan v Markham Real Estate Partners (KSW) Pty Ltd
[2022] NSWCA 154
Cases Cited
29
Statutory Material Cited
3
Almond Investors Ltd v Kualitree Nursery Pty Ltd
[2011] NSWCA 198
CMC (Australia) Pty Limited v Jim Sarantinos
[2013] NSWSC 873