International Enterprises Company Pty Limited v Kingsmede Pty Limited & Anor [2007] NSWADT 15

International Enterprises Company Pty Limited v Kingsmede Pty Limited & Anor [2007] NSWADT 15

The proposal involving Mr Abdollah was not presented to Kingsmede as a request for consent to assignment under the lease and instead required at least negotiation or assurance of a longer lease. Kingsmede owed no duty to prefer International's favoured replacement tenant and, on the facts, gave genuine consideration to Mr Abdollah's proposal. In any event, International failed to prove that fuller consideration would have led to acceptance of the proposal or a material chance of acceptance, so causation and damage were not established. Kingsmede's early lockout on 31 March 2006 was unfair and improper to the extent it did not allow the time specified in its demand letter, but...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 January 2007
Procedural Posture
Retail Lease Dispute Involving Claim for Payment of Money and Unconscionable Conduct Claim / Principal Matter After Hearing
Outcome
International's unconscionable conduct claim was dismissed and Kingsmede and Pamiers succeeded on the cross claim for damages in the amount of $193,926.97.
Legal Topics
['unconscionable Conduct' 'assignment of Lease' 'termination by Re Entry' 'repudiation of Lease' 'damages' 'mitigation' 'bank Guarantee']
['retail Leases' 'contract' 'property Law'] ['unconscionable Conduct' 'assignment of Lease' 'termination by Re Entry' 'repudiation of Lease' 'damages' 'mitigation' 'bank Guarantee']

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 Involving Claim for Payment of Money and Unconscionable Conduct Claim / Principal Matter After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the lessors engaged in unconscionable conduct in connection with a retail shop lease by failing to negotiate with or properly consider a prospective purchaser proposed by the lessee.' 'Whether the lessors acted unconscionably or in bad faith by locking out the lessee and terminating the lease after non-payment of rent.' 'Whether the proposed transaction with the prospective purchaser was a request for consent to assignment of the lease or a proposal requiring a new or longer lease.' 'Whether the lessee repudiated the lease and the lessors were entitled to damages for unpaid rent and loss of bargain subject to mitigation.' 'How damages, expenses and interest should be calculated.']

Ratio Decidendi

The proposal involving Mr Abdollah was not presented to Kingsmede as a request for consent to assignment under the lease and instead required at least negotiation or assurance of a longer lease. Kingsmede owed no duty to prefer International's favoured replacement tenant and, on the facts, gave genuine consideration to Mr Abdollah's proposal. In any event, International failed to prove that fuller consideration would have led to acceptance of the proposal or a material chance of acceptance, so causation and damage were not established. Kingsmede's early lockout on 31 March 2006 was unfair and improper to the extent it did not allow the time specified in its demand letter, but...

Court Disposition

International's unconscionable conduct claim was dismissed and Kingsmede and Pamiers succeeded on the cross claim for damages in the amount of $193,926.97.

Orders

  • ['The Applicant/Cross Respondent is liable to pay the sum of $193,926.97 to the Respondents/Cross Applicants.' "The Applicant/Cross Respondent's unconscionable conduct claim is dismissed." "The Tribunal's interim order of 24 May 2006, prohibiting the Respondents/Cross Applicants from taking any steps to enforce the...