Salisbury v Sonter [2016] NSWCATAP 57
The Tribunal was entitled to find that tenants had permission to paint the premises, despite the lack of written consent, as the evidence supported a verbal agreement and the requirement for written permission could be varied by mutual consent. No loss was proved by the landlords. The Tribunal's reasoning and findings were open on the evidence.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 08 March 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Leave to Appeal and Substantive Appeal
- Outcome
- Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.
- Legal Topics
- ['consent for Alterations by Tenant' 'compensation for Property Damage' 'written Permission Under S 66 Residential Tenancies Act 2010']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Leave to Appeal and Substantive Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the Tribunal erred in finding that tenants had permission to paint the premises without written consent as required by s 66 of the Residential Tenancies Act 2010.' 'Whether the Tribunal erred in finding that the landlords had not proved loss regarding repainting.']
Ratio Decidendi
The Tribunal was entitled to find that tenants had permission to paint the premises, despite the lack of written consent, as the evidence supported a verbal agreement and the requirement for written permission could be varied by mutual consent. No loss was proved by the landlords. The Tribunal's reasoning and findings were open on the evidence.
Court Disposition
Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.
Orders
- ['Leave to appeal granted.' 'Appeal dismissed.']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment