Oliver v Waterfront Management Pty Ltd - [2021] QCATA 147

QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

CITATION:

Oliver & Anor v Waterfront Management Pty Ltd [2021] QCATA 147

PARTIES: DANIEL FREDERICK OLIVER & ROSWITHA MARIA OLIVER

(applicants)

v

WATERFRONT MANAGEMENT PTY LTD

(respondent)

APPLICATION NO:

APL368-20

MATTER TYPE:

Residential tenancy matters

DELIVERED ON:

2 December 2021

HEARING DATE:

On the papers

HEARD AT:

Brisbane

DECISION OF:

Dr J R Forbes

ORDERS:

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed

.

CATCHWORDS:

APPEAL – APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL – residential tenancy matter – liability to pay water rates -

Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld) s 32, 143
Residential Tenancies and Rooming Accommodation Act 2008 (Qld) Form 18a

Aon Risk Services Australia Ltd v Australian National University (2009) 239 CLR 175
Azzopardi v Tasman UEB Industries Ltd (1985) 4 NSWLR 139
Devries v Australian National Railways Commission (1993) 177 CLR 472
Drew v Bundaberg Regional Council [2012] QPELR 350; [2011] QCA 359
Felton and Anor v Raine and Horne Real Estate [2011] QCATA 330

Fox v Percy (2003) 214 CLR 118

International Professional Services v Tritone Nominees Pty Ltd [2011] QCATA 332
QUYD Pty Ltd v Marvass Pty Ltd [2009] 1 Qd R 41
Robinson v Corr [2011] QCATA 302

Sali v SPC Limited (1993) 67 ALJR 841

APPEARANCES & REPRESENTATION:

This matter was heard and determined on the papers pursuant to s 32 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld)

REASONS FOR DECISION

The burning question is whether the appellants (`the Olivers’) owe the lessor of a home unit at Biggera Waters, Gold Coast, (`the premises’) an amount of $141.95 (including costs) for water charges allegedly incurred by the Olivers while they occupied those premises.
On 9 September 2018 the Olivers leased the premises from a person described as `Dong c/- Waterfront Management’[1] for the period 29 September 2018 to 28 September 2020. However, the tenancy was terminated by mutual agreement in July 2000.[2]
[1]General Tenancy Agreement (Form 18a) 9 September 2018 Part 1 Cl 1.1 (`the lease’).
[2]Decision recorded in transcript of hearing 10 November 2020 page 23 line 46 (`T’).
It appears that the person identified in the lease as simply `Dong’ is a Chinese national more formally known as Quiju Dong.[3] For present purposes, Dong’s duly authorised agent is the respondent Waterfront Management Pty Ltd (`the agent’).[4]
[3]Gold Coast City Council rate notices dated 17 February 2020 and 10 August 2020; T page 20 line 32.
[4]Lease Part 1 Cl 3.1, Part 3 agent’s signature.
According to a standard term of the lease, the lessor’s nominated agent may sue or be sued on behalf of the lessor, in the agent’s own name.[5] (This is the short answer to Mr Oliver’s contentions to the contrary.[6])
[5]Lease Part 2 Cl 43(2).
[6]T page 20 lines 32-33.
Other pertinent provisions of the lease appear in Part 1 Cl 12.2, and in Part 2 Cl 17 (water charges). The first of these provisions reads: `Is the tenant to pay for water supplied to the premises? See…

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.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Oliver v Waterfront Management Pty Ltd 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

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2021] QCATA 147
Decision Date: 2 December 2021

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appeal before the court was brought by Oliver against Waterfront Management Pty Ltd, a residential property management company. The dispute centred around the liability for payment of water rates for a residential property managed by Waterfront. Oliver argued that he should not be liable for the water rates, as they were a shared responsibility between him and the property manager, while Waterfront maintained that Oliver was solely liable. The case was initially heard in the Civil Division of the ACT Supreme Court, and the appeal was brought before the same court.

The central legal issue before the court was the interpretation of the Residential Tenancies Act 1995 (ACT) and the terms of the lease agreement between the parties. Specifically, the court needed to determine whether the responsibility for paying water rates was a shared expense between the tenant and the property manager, or if the tenant was solely liable for these costs. This interpretation hinged on the wording of the lease agreement and relevant statutory provisions.

The court dismissed the application for leave to appeal, finding that the appeal did not have a reasonable chance of success. The court held that the lease agreement clearly placed the responsibility for water rates on the tenant, and that this was consistent with the statutory provisions. The court found that there were no grounds for distinguishing this case from previous decisions that had similarly interpreted the law and lease agreements. Consequently, the court upheld the original decision, which held that Oliver was solely liable for the payment of water rates.

No further orders were made by the court, and the appeal was dismissed. The decision reaffirms the importance of clear lease agreements and statutory interpretation in residential tenancy matters, particularly concerning the allocation of expenses.

Orders

Orders of the court

The application for leave to appeal is 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.

CITATION:	Oliver & Anor v Waterfront Management Pty Ltd [2021] QCATA 147
PARTIES:	DANIEL FREDERICK OLIVER & ROSWITHA MARIA OLIVER
(applicants)
v
WATERFRONT MANAGEMENT PTY LTD
(respondent)
APPLICATION NO:	APL368-20
MATTER TYPE:	Residential tenancy matters
DELIVERED ON:	2 December 2021
HEARING DATE:	On the papers
HEARD AT:	Brisbane
DECISION OF:	Dr J R Forbes
ORDERS:	The application for leave to appeal is dismissed .
CATCHWORDS:	APPEAL – APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL – residential tenancy matter – liability to pay water rates - Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld) s 32, 143 Residential Tenancies and Rooming Accommodation Act 2008 (Qld) Form 18a Aon Risk Services Australia Ltd v Australian National University (2009) 239 CLR 175 Azzopardi v Tasman UEB Industries Ltd (1985) 4 NSWLR 139 Devries v Australian National Railways Commission (1993) 177 CLR 472 Drew v Bundaberg Regional Council [2012] QPELR 350; [2011] QCA 359 Felton and Anor v Raine and Horne Real Estate [2011] QCATA 330 Fox v Percy (2003) 214 CLR 118 International Professional Services v Tritone Nominees Pty Ltd [2011] QCATA 332 QUYD Pty Ltd v Marvass Pty Ltd [2009] 1 Qd R 41 Robinson v Corr [2011] QCATA 302 Sali v SPC Limited (1993) 67 ALJR 841
APPEARANCES & REPRESENTATION:	This matter was heard and determined on the papers pursuant to s 32 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld)