Zhang v Manhas

The case of Zhang v Manhas involves a dispute between the applicant, Mr. Zhang, and two respondents, Mr. and Mrs. Manhas, regarding the termination of a residential tenancy agreement. The matter was heard in the Civil and Administrative Tribunal of Western Australia. Mr. Zhang sought the removal of Mrs. Manhas from the lease, claiming that she had abandoned the premises and was no longer contributing to the rental payments. Additionally, he sought damages for repairs and cleaning, as well as unpaid rent and water consumption.

The primary legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the lessor could give conditional consent to a co-tenant leaving a residential tenancy agreement and whether the Tribunal was empowered to make differential payment orders. The Tribunal had to determine if Mrs. Manhas's removal from the lease was justified under the relevant sections of the Residential Tenancies Act 1997 and whether the applicant was entitled to the claimed damages. The Tribunal also needed to assess the appropriate amount of credit to be given to the respondents based on the bond already released to Mr. Zhang.

The Tribunal found that the conditions set by Mr. Zhang for Mrs. Manhas's continued occupancy were unreasonable, and her removal from the lease was justified under section 35A of the Act. The Tribunal ruled that Mr. Zhang was entitled to the claimed damages for repairs and cleaning, as well as the unpaid rent and water consumption. It was determined that the respondents should receive credit for the bond already released to Mr. Zhang, reducing the overall amount they owed him. Accordingly, the Tribunal ordered that Mrs. Manhas be removed from the lease and that both respondents pay Mr. Zhang specific amounts for unpaid rent, water consumption, damages, and legal fees.

The final orders of the Tribunal required the respondents to pay Mr. Zhang certain sums within 28 days, with specific amounts allocated to each respondent based on the credit for the bond already released. This decision provides clarity on the powers of a lessor in relation to co-tenancies and the ability of the Tribunal to make differential payment orders in such cases.