Tabbouche Enterprises Pty Ltd (atf Tabbouche Family Trust) v Cromwell Seven Hills Pty Ltd

Tabbouche Enterprises Pty Ltd (atf Tabbouche Family Trust) sought compensation from Cromwell Seven Hills Pty Ltd for various breaches of the Residential Tenancies Act 2010 and the terms of their lease. The applicant, who was the tenant, alleged that the landlord had failed to provide essential services, caused damage to their personal property, and wrongfully withheld their rental bond. The respondent landlord did not appear in the proceedings, and the tribunal conducted an ex parte hearing, considering it just and equitable to proceed without the landlord's presence. The tribunal was required to determine whether the tenant was entitled to a reduction in rent due to the landlord's failure to provide services, whether the landlord had breached the lease by withholding the rental bond, and whether the landlord was liable for damage to the tenant's personal property.

The tribunal found that the landlord's failure to provide services, including the installation of a new gas hot water system and the repair of a leak, justified a reduction in the rent. However, the tenant's claim for the rental bond was dismissed as it was found that the bond had been properly withheld due to damage to the premises. The tribunal also found that the landlord was liable for damage to the tenant's personal property, including a couch and a television. The tribunal determined that the landlord's breaches of the Residential Tenancies Act 2010 and the lease entitled the tenant to compensation in the amount of $34,900.00.

The tribunal ordered the landlord to pay the tenant $34,900.00 within 30 days of the date of the reasons. The tribunal dismissed the tenant's claims for a reduction in rent and for the return of the rental bond. The tribunal noted that the landlord's failure to appear in the proceedings and defend the claims had significant implications for the outcome of the case. The tribunal found that the tenant had established their claims on the balance of probabilities and that it was just and equitable to make the orders in their favour. The tribunal also noted that the landlord's breaches of the Residential Tenancies Act 2010 and the lease had caused significant inconvenience and loss to the tenant.