Dowse v Butler; Butler v Dowse [2019] NSWCATCD 83

Dowse v Butler; Butler v Dowse [2019] NSWCATCD 83

The tenants' application was dismissed because all elements were commenced outside the three-month limitation period and the Tribunal declined to extend time given the extensive delay, unsatisfactory explanation, prejudice to the landlord and lack of substantial merit. On the landlord's application, the landlord failed to prove the carpet and most cleaning claims and failed to prove lost rent, but proved compensable breaches concerning the dining room curtains, removed LED light globes, cat litter and faeces under the laundry sink, damaged flyscreens and damaged garage door, resulting in compensation of $909.75.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 August 2019
Procedural Posture
Residential Tenancy Compensation Applications / Principal Judgment After Special Fixture Hearing
Outcome
Tenants' application dismissed; landlord's application allowed in part and otherwise dismissed.
Legal Topics
['tenant Compensation for Loss of Comfort and Amenity' 'landlord End of Tenancy Compensation Claim' 'limitation Period for Breach of Residential Tenancy Agreement Claims' 'condition Reports' 'cleaning and Damage at End of Tenancy' 'fair Wear and Tear' 'mitigation of Loss']
['residential Tenancies' 'consumer and Commercial Law'] ['tenant Compensation for Loss of Comfort and Amenity' 'landlord End of Tenancy Compensation Claim' 'limitation Period for Breach of Residential Tenancy Agreement Claims' 'condition Reports' 'cleaning and Damage at End of Tenancy' 'fair Wear and Tear' 'mitigation of Loss']

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 Compensation Applications / Principal Judgment After Special Fixture Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the tenants' compensation application was made within the limitation period or time should be extended." 'Whether the landlord proved that the tenants breached end of tenancy obligations by failing to return the premises in substantially the same condition, fair wear and tear excepted, and reasonably clean.' 'Whether alleged damage to carpets, curtains, light globes, cleaning, flyscreens and the garage door caused compensable loss.' 'Whether the landlord proved lost rent as a reasonably foreseeable consequence of any breach.']

Ratio Decidendi

The tenants' application was dismissed because all elements were commenced outside the three-month limitation period and the Tribunal declined to extend time given the extensive delay, unsatisfactory explanation, prejudice to the landlord and lack of substantial merit. On the landlord's application, the landlord failed to prove the carpet and most cleaning claims and failed to prove lost rent, but proved compensable breaches concerning the dining room curtains, removed LED light globes, cat litter and faeces under the laundry sink, damaged flyscreens and damaged garage door, resulting in compensation of $909.75.

Court Disposition

Tenants' application dismissed; landlord's application allowed in part and otherwise dismissed.

Orders

  • ["In application no RT 19/12756 (the tenant's application): (1) Bradley Lewis is added as an applicant." '(2) The application is dismissed.' "In application no RT 19/15219 (the landlord's application): (3) Bradley Lewis is added as a respondent." '(4) The tenants, Toni Dowse and Bradley Lewis, must pay the landlord,...