Bryshan Pty Limited v AASCO Pty Limited [2010] NSWDC 30

Bryshan Pty Limited v AASCO Pty Limited [2010] NSWDC 30

Bryshan acted lawfully and in accordance with the leases when it changed the locks and re-entered the units because rent was overdue, and Aasco thereafter occupied as a monthly tenant when restored to possession. Bryshan was therefore entitled to damages for unpaid rent and interest only for the periods allowed by the lease and its continued possession of the property. Aasco's cross-claim in conversion failed because the Court did not accept the evidence alleging removal of goods by Bryshan or Gary Wooding, and Aasco did not sufficiently prove the goods allegedly converted or their value.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 March 2010
Procedural Posture
District Court Civil Landlord and Tenant Dispute Involving Unpaid Rent and Cross Claim for Conversion / Judgment After Hearing
Outcome
Verdict and judgment for the plaintiff against both defendants; cross-claim dismissed.
Legal Topics
['unpaid Rent' 'lease Re Entry' 'termination of Lease' 'damages for Breach of Lease' 'monthly Tenancy' 'conversion' 'credit Evidence' 'proof of Loss']
['landlord and Tenant' 'property Law' 'contract Law' 'tort Law'] ['unpaid Rent' 'lease Re Entry' 'termination of Lease' 'damages for Breach of Lease' 'monthly Tenancy' 'conversion' 'credit Evidence' 'proof 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

District Court Civil Landlord and Tenant Dispute Involving Unpaid Rent and Cross Claim for Conversion / Judgment After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether Bryshan lawfully re-entered and took possession of units 1 and 2 when rent was overdue.' 'Whether Bryshan repudiated the leases by changing the locks and re-taking possession.' 'Whether Bryshan was entitled to damages for unpaid rent and interest, and for what period.' "Whether Bryshan or Gary Wooding converted Aasco's stock and goods stored in unit 1." 'Whether Aasco proved the identity, quantity and value of the goods allegedly converted.']

Ratio Decidendi

Bryshan acted lawfully and in accordance with the leases when it changed the locks and re-entered the units because rent was overdue, and Aasco thereafter occupied as a monthly tenant when restored to possession. Bryshan was therefore entitled to damages for unpaid rent and interest only for the periods allowed by the lease and its continued possession of the property. Aasco's cross-claim in conversion failed because the Court did not accept the evidence alleging removal of goods by Bryshan or Gary Wooding, and Aasco did not sufficiently prove the goods allegedly converted or their value.

Court Disposition

Verdict and judgment for the plaintiff against both defendants; cross-claim dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Verdict and judgment for the plaintiff against both defendants in the sum of $36,592.96 comprising rent due of $27,746.56 and interest of $8,846.40.' 'The cross-claim is dismissed.' "The defendants are to pay the costs of the plaintiff's claim." "The cross-claimant is to pay the cross-defendant's costs of the...