Gravina v Ruehl [2018] NSWCATAP 267

The premises were found uninhabitable for four days due to excessive lead levels following renovation works, entitling the appellants to a rent abatement for that period. The senior member erred by not reaching this conclusion; only the sum for rent abatement is awarded.

Parties: First Appellant: David Gravina; Second Appellant: Luscheyne Mellon; First Respondent: Mercedes Ruehl; Second Respondent: Oliver McCauley
Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 13 November 2018
Procedural Posture: Appeal / Appeal Determination
Outcome: Appeal allowed in part; decision under appeal varied
Legal Topics: Renovation Works, Lead Contamination, Quiet Enjoyment, Maintenance Obligations, Disclosure Obligations

Residential Tenancy Consumer Law Renovation Works Lead Contamination Quiet Enjoyment Maintenance Obligations Disclosure Obligations

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1

Parties

David Gravina

First Appellant

Luscheyne Mellon

Second Appellant

Mercedes Ruehl

First Respondent

Oliver McCauley

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Appeal Determination

Legal Issues

1 Whether the premises were uninhabitable due to lead contamination following renovation work
2 Whether the landlord breached duties of disclosure, care, and quiet enjoyment
3 Appropriateness of cleaning and remedial actions taken by the landlord

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; decision under appeal varied

Orders

The appeal is allowed in part
The respondents are to pay the appellants an additional sum of $371.36 representing four days' rental payments