Yassine v Saeed; Saeed v Yassine [2022] NSWCATCD 78

Yassine v Saeed; Saeed v Yassine [2022] NSWCATCD 78

The tenant failed to prove that the landlord reduced or withdrew any goods, services or facilities or breached the duty to maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair. The evidence did not establish continuing electrical disrepair or that mould was caused by water ingress from roof, plumbing, drainage or structural defects attributable to the landlord. The tenant's rent reduction and compensation claims were therefore dismissed. The landlord proved that mould on walls and ceilings developed during the tenancy because of condensation and inadequate cleaning and ventilation contrary to the tenant's obligations, that the lawns were returned in a substantially deteriorated condition...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 May 2022
Procedural Posture
Residential Tenancy Applications in the Consumer and Commercial Division of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal of New South Wales / Remitted Tenant Applications for Redetermination Heard Together With Landlord's Application
Outcome
The tenant's applications in RT 21/39348 and RT 21/39349 were dismissed; the landlord's application in RT 21/41277 succeeded in the amount of $951.00.
Legal Topics
['excessive Rent' 'reduction or Withdrawal of Goods, Services or Facilities' "landlord's Duty to Maintain Premises in a Reasonable State of Repair" "tenant's End of Tenancy Cleaning Obligations" 'lawns and Gardens at End of Tenancy' 'water Usage Charges' 'mould and Alleged Water Ingress']
['residential Tenancies' 'consumer and Commercial Law'] ['excessive Rent' 'reduction or Withdrawal of Goods, Services or Facilities' "landlord's Duty to Maintain Premises in a Reasonable State of Repair" "tenant's End of Tenancy Cleaning Obligations" 'lawns and Gardens at End of Tenancy' 'water Usage Charges' 'mould and Alleged Water Ingress']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Residential Tenancy Applications in the Consumer and Commercial Division of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal of New South Wales / Remitted Tenant Applications for Redetermination Heard Together With Landlord's Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether rent was excessive because the landlord reduced or withdrew goods, services or facilities provided with the residential premises.' 'Whether the landlord breached the duty to maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair by failing to repair alleged roof, mould, water ingress or electrical issues.' "Whether the tenant was entitled to compensation for alleged damage and loss caused by the landlord's breach of repair obligations." 'Whether the tenant breached end-of-tenancy obligations to leave the premises reasonably clean, including in relation to mould.' 'Whether the tenant breached obligations concerning the condition of lawns at the end of the tenancy.' 'Whether the tenant was liable for water usage charges for the period 11 December 2020 to 5 July 2021.']

Ratio Decidendi

The tenant failed to prove that the landlord reduced or withdrew any goods, services or facilities or breached the duty to maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair. The evidence did not establish continuing electrical disrepair or that mould was caused by water ingress from roof, plumbing, drainage or structural defects attributable to the landlord. The tenant's rent reduction and compensation claims were therefore dismissed. The landlord proved that mould on walls and ceilings developed during the tenancy because of condensation and inadequate cleaning and ventilation contrary to the tenant's obligations, that the lawns were returned in a substantially deteriorated condition...

Court Disposition

The tenant's applications in RT 21/39348 and RT 21/39349 were dismissed; the landlord's application in RT 21/41277 succeeded in the amount of $951.00.

Orders

  • ['In RT 21/39348 and RT 21/39349, the applications are dismissed.' 'In RT 21/41277, Billal Yassine must pay Tariq Saeed $951.00 immediately.']