NSW Land and Housing Corporation v Stephen Kline [2014] NSWCATCD 210

NSW Land and Housing Corporation v Stephen Kline [2014] NSWCATCD 210

The tenant seriously threatened and abused Mr Routley on 7 April 2014, satisfying s 92(1)(a), but the discretionary factors favoured not terminating the tenancy, particularly the tenant's very serious medical conditions, the likely adverse physical and psychological consequences of eviction, the lack of evidence of similar incidents before or since, and the landlord's attendance for an inspection without notice to the tenant through his authorised agent WentWest. A specific performance order was not appropriate because it was not sought in the application, no amendment application was made, and breach of the tenancy agreement was not established.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 October 2014
Procedural Posture
Application Seeking Termination of a Social Housing Tenancy Agreement Pursuant to S 92 of the Residential Tenancies Act 2010 / Rehearing After Appeal Panel Allowed the Tenant's Appeal and Remitted the Proceedings
Outcome
The application is dismissed.
Legal Topics
['termination of Tenancy' "seriously Threatened or Abused Landlord's Agent" 'tribunal Discretion' 'property Inspection Notice' 'specific Performance Order']
['residential Tenancy' 'social Housing'] ['termination of Tenancy' "seriously Threatened or Abused Landlord's Agent" 'tribunal Discretion' 'property Inspection Notice' 'specific Performance Order']

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

Application Seeking Termination of a Social Housing Tenancy Agreement Pursuant to S 92 of the Residential Tenancies Act 2010 / Rehearing After Appeal Panel Allowed the Tenant's Appeal and Remitted the Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Did the tenant breach s 92(1)(a) by seriously or persistently threatening or abusing Mr Routley?' 'If so, should the Tribunal exercise its discretion to terminate the tenancy agreement?' 'If the Tribunal does not terminate the tenancy agreement, should any other orders be made?']

Ratio Decidendi

The tenant seriously threatened and abused Mr Routley on 7 April 2014, satisfying s 92(1)(a), but the discretionary factors favoured not terminating the tenancy, particularly the tenant's very serious medical conditions, the likely adverse physical and psychological consequences of eviction, the lack of evidence of similar incidents before or since, and the landlord's attendance for an inspection without notice to the tenant through his authorised agent WentWest. A specific performance order was not appropriate because it was not sought in the application, no amendment application was made, and breach of the tenancy agreement was not established.

Court Disposition

The application is dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The application is dismissed.']