Shepley v Robinson [2020] NSWCATAP 125

Shepley v Robinson [2020] NSWCATAP 125

The Appeal Panel held that most of the landlord's complaints disclosed no error of law and did not satisfy the test for leave to appeal, because the Member's findings on utilities, cleaning and alleged damage were reasonably open on the evidence and the landlord was not denied procedural fairness. However, the Member erred in refusing the sensor light claim solely because the landlord, a licensed electrician, performed the work himself, and erred in the lost rent claim by failing to identify how the tenancy terminated and to apply the relevant provisions of the Residential Tenancies Act 2010. The tenancy continued as a periodic tenancy after the fixed term and was abandoned when the...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 June 2020
Procedural Posture
Internal Appeal in Residential Tenancy Proceedings / Appeal From Decision of the Consumer and Commercial Division of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Dated 9 September 2019
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted and appeal allowed in part; tenant ordered to pay the landlord $1,344.70; costs application dismissed.
Legal Topics
['internal Appeal' 'leave to Appeal' 'substantial Miscarriage of Justice' 'abandonment' 'compensation for Loss' 'rent Arrears' 'repairs and Damage' 'utilities' 'costs']
['residential Tenancy Law' 'civil Procedure' 'tribunal Appeals'] ['internal Appeal' 'leave to Appeal' 'substantial Miscarriage of Justice' 'abandonment' 'compensation for Loss' 'rent Arrears' 'repairs and Damage' 'utilities' 'costs']

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

Internal Appeal in Residential Tenancy Proceedings / Appeal From Decision of the Consumer and Commercial Division of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Dated 9 September 2019

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Tribunal denied the landlord procedural fairness by allowing the tenant to interrupt and by refusing some evidence from the landlord while allowing evidence from the tenant.' "Whether leave to appeal should be granted on grounds that the Tribunal's decision was not fair and equitable, was against the weight of evidence, or involved significant new evidence." 'Whether the Tribunal erred in dismissing claims for water and electricity charges.' 'Whether the Tribunal erred in finding that the premises were left reasonably clean and in rejecting claims for cleaning and alleged damage to decking, an oven and kitchen flooring.' 'Whether the landlord was entitled to recover the reasonable cost of restoring a moved sensor light where he performed the work himself as a licensed electrician.' 'Whether the Tribunal erred by failing to determine how the tenancy terminated before deciding the claim for lost rent.' 'Whether special circumstances justified an award of costs.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Appeal Panel held that most of the landlord's complaints disclosed no error of law and did not satisfy the test for leave to appeal, because the Member's findings on utilities, cleaning and alleged damage were reasonably open on the evidence and the landlord was not denied procedural fairness. However, the Member erred in refusing the sensor light claim solely because the landlord, a licensed electrician, performed the work himself, and erred in the lost rent claim by failing to identify how the tenancy terminated and to apply the relevant provisions of the Residential Tenancies Act 2010. The tenancy continued as a periodic tenancy after the fixed term and was abandoned when the...

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted and appeal allowed in part; tenant ordered to pay the landlord $1,344.70; costs application dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal granted.' 'Appeal allowed.' 'The tenant is to pay the landlord the sum of $1,344.70 within 14 days.' 'Orders 1 and 2 made in RT 19/30915 and RT 29276 on 9 September 2019 are otherwise affirmed.' "The landlord's application for costs is dismissed."]