Nguyen v Ryan [2022] NSWCATAP 139

Nguyen v Ryan [2022] NSWCATAP 139

The Appeal Panel refused leave and dismissed the appeal because the landlord did not establish any error or that he may have suffered a substantial miscarriage of justice. It was open to the Tribunal to accept the tenant's evidence that she did not cause the blockage, to find that notice was given to the agent and a reasonable opportunity to repair was provided, and to accept the invoice containing a licence number as evidence that the repairs were carried out by a licensed person. The asserted new evidence was already before the Tribunal and did not support a different conclusion.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 May 2022
Procedural Posture
Internal Appeal in Residential Tenancy Proceedings Concerning Reimbursement of Urgent Repair Costs / Appeal Panel Decision on Leave to Appeal and Appeal From Consumer and Commercial Division Decision Dated 3 February 2022
Outcome
Leave to appeal refused; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['urgent Repairs' 'reimbursement of Tenant for Repair Costs' 'internal Appeal' 'leave to Appeal' 'substantial Miscarriage of Justice' 'weight of Evidence']
['residential Tenancy Law' 'administrative Law' 'civil Procedure'] ['urgent Repairs' 'reimbursement of Tenant for Repair Costs' 'internal Appeal' 'leave to Appeal' 'substantial Miscarriage of Justice' 'weight of Evidence']

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

Internal Appeal in Residential Tenancy Proceedings Concerning Reimbursement of Urgent Repair Costs / Appeal Panel Decision on Leave to Appeal and Appeal From Consumer and Commercial Division Decision Dated 3 February 2022

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the landlord established an error of law or grounds for leave to appeal from the order reimbursing the tenant for urgent plumbing repairs.' 'Whether the toilet blockage resulted from a breach of the residential tenancy agreement by the tenant.' "Whether the tenant gave the landlord or landlord's agent notice of the state of disrepair and a reasonable opportunity to make the repairs." 'Whether the tenant made a reasonable attempt to arrange for the person nominated in the residential tenancy agreement to carry out the repairs.' 'Whether the repairs were carried out by a licensed or otherwise properly qualified person.' 'Whether the landlord may have suffered a substantial miscarriage of justice because the decision was not fair and equitable, was against the weight of evidence, or significant new evidence had arisen.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Appeal Panel refused leave and dismissed the appeal because the landlord did not establish any error or that he may have suffered a substantial miscarriage of justice. It was open to the Tribunal to accept the tenant's evidence that she did not cause the blockage, to find that notice was given to the agent and a reasonable opportunity to repair was provided, and to accept the invoice containing a licence number as evidence that the repairs were carried out by a licensed person. The asserted new evidence was already before the Tribunal and did not support a different conclusion.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal refused; appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal refused.' 'Appeal dismissed.']