Sarina Investments Pty Ltd v Brotherhood of St Laurence

Sarina Investments Pty Ltd brought proceedings against Brotherhood of St Laurence seeking to terminate a lease for allegedly repudiatory breaches of lease. Brotherhood of St Laurence counterclaimed for damages for breaches of lease by Sarina Investments Pty Ltd. The defendants applied to have the case transferred to the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal, arguing that the premises were retail premises within the meaning of the Retail Leases Act 2003 and that the Tribunal had exclusive jurisdiction over the dispute. The primary issue for the court was whether the premises leased by Sarina Investments Pty Ltd to Brotherhood of St Laurence were retail premises within the meaning of the Retail Leases Act 2003.

The court found that the premises were not retail premises as they were used by Brotherhood of St Laurence to administer programs supported by government grant and private subvention and no fee or reward was paid or payable for the services provided. The court held that the premises were not used for the retail supply of services within the meaning of the Retail Leases Act 2003 and therefore the dispute was not within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal. The application to transfer the case to the Tribunal was dismissed.

The court further found that the defendants had failed to establish any of the grounds for termination of the lease set out in the Retail Leases Act 2003. The plaintiff’s claim was dismissed with costs. The counterclaim by Brotherhood of St Laurence for damages for breaches of lease by Sarina Investments Pty Ltd was referred to mediation.