THE HURST-MEYERS CHARITY LTD ACN 611 166 119 v KHAN & ORS (Residential Tenancies)

Hurst-Meyers Charity Ltd (the applicant) brought an action against Khan and others (the respondents) in the Residential Tenancies Tribunal of the ACT. The applicant sought compensation for repairs and cleaning costs after the respondents vacated the property. The respondents counterclaimed for compensation due to alleged failures to repair, wrongful eviction, the property not being as advertised, breach of quiet enjoyment, and the value of contra work performed. The Tribunal was required to determine the validity of the contra work clause in the lease agreement, the applicant's entitlement to compensation for repairs and cleaning, and the respondents' counterclaims.

The Tribunal first considered the contra work clause, which stipulated that the respondents would perform certain work in lieu of part of the rent. The Tribunal found the clause void due to the absence of a formal written agreement as required by the Residential Tenancies Act. Despite this, the Tribunal held the applicant entitled to compensation for repairs and cleaning. The Tribunal reasoned that the contra work clause did not affect the validity of the lease agreement or the applicant's entitlement to compensation for breaches of the agreement. Regarding the respondents' counterclaims, the Tribunal dismissed all claims due to a lack of sufficient evidence or because they were outside the Tribunal's jurisdiction.

The Tribunal ordered that the respondents jointly and severally owed the applicant $10,784.91. This amount was later reduced to $8,684.91 after accounting for the return of the rental bond. The Tribunal also directed ACT Rental Bonds to release the entire bond of $2,100 to the applicant. The Tribunal dismissed all counterclaims from the respondents.