Curry v Eftimovski [2023] NSWCATAP 290

Curry v Eftimovski [2023] NSWCATAP 290

The appeal grounds did not raise a question of law and leave was required. The Tribunal had considered whether the termination notice was retaliatory, dealt with the evidence, and was entitled not to be satisfied that the notice was motivated wholly or partly by the Tenant's proposed Tribunal proceedings or police report. The compensation amount for repair breaches was reasonably open on the evidence. The Tenant did not show a substantial miscarriage of justice, and new claims for compliance orders or further compensation could not be raised for the first time on appeal.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
31 October 2023
Procedural Posture
Residential Tenancy Appeal / Appeal Panel Appeal From Orders of the Consumer and Commercial Division; Leave to Appeal Considered
Outcome
Leave to appeal refused and appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['retaliatory Termination Notice' 'termination Under S 85 of the Residential Tenancies Act 2010 (nsw)' 'landlord Repair Obligations' 'compensation for Failure to Repair' 'leave to Appeal']
['residential Tenancy Law' 'civil and Administrative Tribunal Procedure'] ['retaliatory Termination Notice' 'termination Under S 85 of the Residential Tenancies Act 2010 (nsw)' 'landlord Repair Obligations' 'compensation for Failure to Repair' 'leave to Appeal']

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 Appeal / Appeal Panel Appeal From Orders of the Consumer and Commercial Division; Leave to Appeal Considered

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Tribunal erred in declining to declare the termination notice to be retaliatory under s 115 of the Residential Tenancies Act 2010 (NSW).' "Whether leave to appeal should be granted in relation to the compensation awarded for the landlord's failure to effect repairs." 'Whether compliance orders or further compensation claims could be raised for the first time on appeal.']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal grounds did not raise a question of law and leave was required. The Tribunal had considered whether the termination notice was retaliatory, dealt with the evidence, and was entitled not to be satisfied that the notice was motivated wholly or partly by the Tenant's proposed Tribunal proceedings or police report. The compensation amount for repair breaches was reasonably open on the evidence. The Tenant did not show a substantial miscarriage of justice, and new claims for compliance orders or further compensation could not be raised for the first time on appeal.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal refused and appeal dismissed.

Orders

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