Williams v Wentworth [2022] NSWCATAP 22

Williams v Wentworth [2022] NSWCATAP 22

The tenant established no basis for upholding the appeal because the use of the name Mickey Williams did not invalidate the order where she accepted she was also known by that name, any alleged non-service of documents did not cause injustice in relation to daily rent and occupation fee calculations, the asserted COVID impacts and harassment were unsupported or irrelevant to liability for rent and occupation fees absent any rent reduction or compensation order, and the hearing proceeding in her absence did not cause procedural unfairness. Time was nevertheless extended to amend the tenant's name and to give effect to the landlord's concession reducing the amount by $650 for electricity...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
31 January 2022
Procedural Posture
Internal Appeal in a Residential Tenancy Dispute / Appeal From New South Wales Civil & Administrative Tribunal, Consumer and Commercial Division Decision of 9 September 2021
Outcome
Time for lodgment of the appeal extended; appeal otherwise dismissed except to amend the appellant's name and reduce the amount payable from $8,878.57 to $8,228.57.
Legal Topics
['internal Appeal' 'extension of Time' 'rent Arrears' 'occupation Fee' 'service of Documents' 'procedural Fairness' 'tenant Identity and Amendment of Name' 'electricity Charges']
['residential Tenancy Law' 'civil Procedure' 'administrative Law'] ['internal Appeal' 'extension of Time' 'rent Arrears' 'occupation Fee' 'service of Documents' 'procedural Fairness' 'tenant Identity and Amendment of Name' 'electricity Charges']

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 a Residential Tenancy Dispute / Appeal From New South Wales Civil & Administrative Tribunal, Consumer and Commercial Division Decision of 9 September 2021

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether time for lodgment of the appeal should be extended.' 'Whether the order was invalid because the tenant was named as Mickey Williams rather than Michaella Williams.' "Whether alleged non-service of the landlord's documents caused procedural unfairness." 'Whether alleged COVID restrictions, intimidation, harassment, or the cutting off of electricity affected liability for rent arrears and occupation fees.' 'Whether the amount ordered should be reduced by electricity charges claimed where the premises did not have a separate electricity meter.']

Ratio Decidendi

The tenant established no basis for upholding the appeal because the use of the name Mickey Williams did not invalidate the order where she accepted she was also known by that name, any alleged non-service of documents did not cause injustice in relation to daily rent and occupation fee calculations, the asserted COVID impacts and harassment were unsupported or irrelevant to liability for rent and occupation fees absent any rent reduction or compensation order, and the hearing proceeding in her absence did not cause procedural unfairness. Time was nevertheless extended to amend the tenant's name and to give effect to the landlord's concession reducing the amount by $650 for electricity...

Court Disposition

Time for lodgment of the appeal extended; appeal otherwise dismissed except to amend the appellant's name and reduce the amount payable from $8,878.57 to $8,228.57.

Orders

  • ['Time for lodgment of the appeal is extended to 7 October 2021.' 'Except for the purposes of making the following orders the appeal is dismissed.' 'The name of the Respondent in the proceedings below and the Appellant in this appeal is amended to Michaella Williams (also known as Mickey Williams).' 'The order made...