Re Bajaj - [2025] WASC 313

JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
IN CHAMBERS

CITATION:   RE BAJAJ; EX PARTE BAJAJ [2025] WASC 313
CORAM:   SEAWARD J
HEARD:   4 AUGUST 2025
DELIVERED          :   6 AUGUST 2025
FILE NO/S:   CIV 1779 of 2025
MATTER:   IN THE MATTER OF BAJAJ

EX PARTE
RAMESH BAJAJ
Applicant

Catchwords:

Application for review order under s 36 of the Magistrates Court Act 2004 (WA) - Residential Tenancies Act 1987 (WA) - Whether applicant has established an arguable case of jurisdictional error by a registrar - Whether a registrar had jurisdiction to hear application - Whether application before the registrar an abuse of process - Turns on own facts

Legislation:

Magistrates Court (Civil Proceedings) Act 2004 (WA)
Magistrates Court (Minor Cases Procedures) Rules 2005 (WA)
Magistrates Court Act 2004 (WA) s 36
Residential Tenancies Act 1987 (WA)
Residential Tenancies Regulations 1989 (WA)

Result:

Application dismissed

Category: B

Representation:

Counsel:

Applicant

In Person

Solicitors:

Applicant

In Person

Cases referred to in decision:

Bajaj v Magistrate Trevor Darge [2021] WASCA 218
Craig v South Australia [1995] HCA 58; (1995) 184 CLR 163
Hemmett v Market Direct Group Pty Ltd [2018] WASC 214
Rayney v AW [2009] WASCA 203
Re Carey; Ex parte Exclude Holdings Pty Ltd [2006] WASCA 219; (2006) 32 WAR 501
Zucal v Harper [2005] WASCA 76; (2005) 29 WAR 563

SEAWARD J:

Introduction

Mr Bajaj is the owner of a property in Derby Road, Shenton Park. In January 2025, he rented that property to a new tenant. Mr Bajaj then wished to undertake some repairs and maintenance to the property. Unfortunately, it appears that Mr Bajaj and his new tenant have not agreed on some aspects of the works. This has resulted in Mr Bajaj taking steps under the Residential Tenancies Act 1987 (WA) (RT Act) in the Magistrates Court to terminate the residential tenancy agreement. The tenant opposes that application.
The matter came before a registrar of the Magistrates Court on 15 May 2025. On that date, the registrar made orders programming Mr Bajaj's application to a trial on 17 July 2025.
Mr Bajaj applies by originating motion filed 17 July 2025 under s 36 of the Magistrates Court Act 2004 (WA) (MC Act) for a review order and a stay in relation to the decision and orders of the registrar made on 15 May 2025.
The matter came before the court on an ex parte basis on 4 August 2025. Mr Bajaj filed an affidavit sworn by himself on 16 July 2025, attaching the relevant documents and also made oral submissions. Mr Bajaj also filed written submissions dated 31 July 2025.
Mr Bajaj's application raises the following issues:
(1)Has Mr Bajaj established an arguable case that the registrar made a jurisdictional error such that a show cause order should be issued?
(2)If so, are there exceptional circumstances to justify the grant of a stay of the relevant orders made by the registrar pending final determination of the review order application?

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 Re Bajaj

Details

AGLC: Re Bajaj [2025] WASC 313
Case: [2025] WASC 313
Decision Date: 6 AUGUST 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicant, Mr Bajaj, sought judicial review of a decision made by a registrar of the Magistrates Court of Western Australia. The application related to a dispute under the Residential Tenancies Act 1987 (WA), where the registrar had dismissed Mr Bajaj's application for relief under the Act. The central issue before the court was whether Mr Bajaj had established an arguable case of jurisdictional error by the registrar. Additionally, the court had to determine if the registrar had the jurisdiction to hear the application and whether the proceedings before the registrar constituted an abuse of process.

The court examined the nature of the application and the authority of the registrar in the context of the Residential Tenancies Act. It assessed whether the registrar's decision to dismiss the application was a jurisdictional error. The court noted that the registrar had the authority to hear applications under the Act and that the application itself did not constitute an abuse of process. The court found that the registrar's decision was within their jurisdiction and that no jurisdictional error had been made. Consequently, the application for judicial review was dismissed.

The court held that the registrar had jurisdiction to hear the application and that no abuse of process had occurred. Given the absence of an arguable case of jurisdictional error, the application for judicial review was unsuccessful. The decision confirmed the registrar's authority and the procedural correctness of the dismissal of Mr Bajaj's application.

Orders