Street v Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal

The case of Street v Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal involved a dispute between the tenant, Street, and the Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal (the Tribunal). The matter before the court centred on the Tribunal's decision to terminate a tenancy, specifically questioning the sufficiency of the notice provided by the Tribunal and the grounds for termination. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales.

The legal issues before the court included the adequacy of the notice provided by the Tribunal in relation to the termination of the tenancy, the particulars of the grounds for termination, and the Tribunal's power to order alternative accommodation. The court was required to determine whether the notice complied with statutory requirements and whether the Tribunal had the authority to order alternative accommodation for the tenant.

In its decision, the court found that the notice provided by the Tribunal was insufficient as it did not include sufficient particulars of the ground for termination, as required by the Residential Tenancies Act. The court held that the Tribunal is not empowered to order alternative accommodation for a tenant, but rather must consider the circumstances of the case to determine if it is appropriate to make an order. The court concluded that the Tribunal's decision to terminate the tenancy was valid, but the notice provided was inadequate.

The court ordered that the notice provided by the Tribunal be set aside and that a new notice be issued with sufficient particulars of the grounds for termination. The court also clarified that the Tribunal's power to order alternative accommodation was limited to considering the circumstances of the case and deciding if it was appropriate to make such an order.