JAIN GAO & HUI YUAN GAO v LEO SIAM PTY LTD [2013] NSWADT 58

JAIN GAO & HUI YUAN GAO v LEO SIAM PTY LTD [2013] NSWADT 58

The lessors failed to provide the required disclosure statement to the lessee company, entitling the lessee to rescind the lease. Additionally, the lessors breached statutory and contractual obligations by failing to install a compliant waterproof membrane under the flooring, as required for food premises, and engaged in misleading and unconscionable conduct by providing false certificates, refusing expert opinions, and failing to rectify defects. The lessee was therefore entitled to rescind, recover its losses, and obtain compensation for damages and legal costs.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 March 2013
Procedural Posture
Retail Lease Dispute / Final Judgment After Defended Hearing
Outcome
Applicant lessors' claims dismissed; respondent lessee's cross-application allowed in substantial part.
Legal Topics
['retail Leases' 'unconscionable Conduct' 'misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'implied Terms in Leases' 'breach of Lease' 'building Standards Compliance']
['property Law' 'commercial Law'] ['retail Leases' 'unconscionable Conduct' 'misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'implied Terms in Leases' 'breach of Lease' 'building Standards Compliance']

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

Retail Lease Dispute / Final Judgment After Defended Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the lessors failed to provide the requisite disclosure statement under the Retail Leases Act 1994 to the lessee company, giving rise to a right to rescind;' 'Whether the lessors breached the lease by failing to construct the floor in accordance with statutory and implied contractual requirements for waterproofing and building standards;' 'Whether the lessors engaged in unconscionable, misleading or deceptive conduct in relation to the lease and fit-out;' 'Entitlement of the lessee to damages, return of monies paid, and costs.']

Ratio Decidendi

The lessors failed to provide the required disclosure statement to the lessee company, entitling the lessee to rescind the lease. Additionally, the lessors breached statutory and contractual obligations by failing to install a compliant waterproof membrane under the flooring, as required for food premises, and engaged in misleading and unconscionable conduct by providing false certificates, refusing expert opinions, and failing to rectify defects. The lessee was therefore entitled to rescind, recover its losses, and obtain compensation for damages and legal costs.

Court Disposition

Applicant lessors' claims dismissed; respondent lessee's cross-application allowed in substantial part.

Orders

  • ['Applicants Jian Gao and Hui Yuan Gao must pay to the Respondent Leo Siam Pty Ltd by way of compensation and damages the sum of $58,280.95.' 'Applicants must execute all documents and do all acts necessary to release the rental bond under the lease and cause payment of the bond to the Respondent as part payment of...