Fanny Sau Ching Chan v Wie Zhang and Yi Qin Zhang [2014] NSWCATCD 9

Fanny Sau Ching Chan v Wie Zhang and Yi Qin Zhang [2014] NSWCATCD 9

The tenant did not establish a compensable breach of the residential tenancy agreement by the landlords for the building works, and the alleged inconvenience and distress were non-economic loss not shown to reach the Civil Liability Act 2002 threshold. However, the premises were partly not habitable because the balcony could not be used after tiles were removed and a black sheet was placed over the sliding door, justifying a 10% rent abatement for 18 April 2013 to 27 May 2013 and refund of overpaid rent from 28 to 31 May 2013. The landlords' compensation claim failed because they did not prove damage beyond fair wear and tear, liability for repainting or cleaning, or any basis for rental...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 January 2014
Procedural Posture
Residential Tenancy Applications for Compensation, Rent Reduction or Abatement, Refund of Rent, and Landlord Compensation Claim / Final Decision
Outcome
Tenant's application RT 13/38904 allowed in part; landlords' application RT 13/47979 dismissed.
Legal Topics
['rent Abatement' 'uninhabitable Premises' 'quiet Enjoyment' 'non Economic Loss' 'tenant Compensation' 'landlord Compensation Claim' 'fair Wear and Tear']
['residential Tenancy Law' 'consumer and Commercial Law'] ['rent Abatement' 'uninhabitable Premises' 'quiet Enjoyment' 'non Economic Loss' 'tenant Compensation' 'landlord Compensation Claim' 'fair Wear and Tear']

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 for Compensation, Rent Reduction or Abatement, Refund of Rent, and Landlord Compensation Claim / Final Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the tenant was entitled to compensation for construction works affecting the premises.' 'Whether rent should be reduced or abated under section 45 of the Residential Tenancies Act 2010 because the premises were wholly or partly uninhabitable.' 'Whether the tenant was entitled to a refund of rent paid after vacating the premises.' 'Whether the landlords proved claims for cleaning, repairs, carpet replacement, painting and rental loss.']

Ratio Decidendi

The tenant did not establish a compensable breach of the residential tenancy agreement by the landlords for the building works, and the alleged inconvenience and distress were non-economic loss not shown to reach the Civil Liability Act 2002 threshold. However, the premises were partly not habitable because the balcony could not be used after tiles were removed and a black sheet was placed over the sliding door, justifying a 10% rent abatement for 18 April 2013 to 27 May 2013 and refund of overpaid rent from 28 to 31 May 2013. The landlords' compensation claim failed because they did not prove damage beyond fair wear and tear, liability for repainting or cleaning, or any basis for rental...

Court Disposition

Tenant's application RT 13/38904 allowed in part; landlords' application RT 13/47979 dismissed.

Orders

  • ['In application RT 13/38904 Wei Zhang and Yi Qin Zhang are to pay to Fanny Sau Ching Chan $923.88 within 14 days.' 'Application RT 13/47979 is dismissed.']