Yan v Yan; Yan v Yan [2023] NSWCATCD 143
The landlord breached s 63 of the Residential Tenancies Act 2010 (NSW) by failing to repair the air conditioner for the whole three months that the tenants lived in the premises, despite noting it was to be repaired. Blaming the strata corporation or cost of repairs did not excuse the breach, and the use of fans was not a comparable solution. Given the significant rent, the ongoing lack of a promised amenity, the tenants' impact, and the landlord's related conduct including failure to lodge the bond within time and requiring excessive rent in advance, the breach justified termination under s 103. The tenants therefore did not abandon the tenancy and were not liable for the break fee. The...
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 30 October 2023
- Procedural Posture
- Residential Tenancy Applications in the Consumer and Commercial Division of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal of New South Wales / Final Hearing and Principal Judgment
- Outcome
- The tenants' application was allowed in part and the landlord's application was dismissed.
- Legal Topics
- ['breach of Residential Tenancy Agreement' 'termination by Tribunal' 'abandonment' 'break Fee' 'rental Bond' 'failure to Lodge Bond' "landlord's Obligation to Maintain Premises in a Reasonable State of Repair" 'compensation' 'cleaning Claim' 'swipe Cards']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Residential Tenancy Applications in the Consumer and Commercial Division of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal of New South Wales / Final Hearing and Principal Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the landlord breached the residential tenancy agreement by failing to repair or maintain the air conditioner and other items.' "Whether the landlord's breach was sufficient to justify termination of the residential tenancy agreement under s 103 of the Residential Tenancies Act 2010 (NSW)." 'Whether the tenants abandoned the premises and were liable for a break fee or compensation to the landlord.' 'Whether the tenants were entitled to compensation for breach of s 63 of the Residential Tenancies Act 2010 (NSW).' 'Whether the landlord proved entitlement to deductions from the rental bond for cleaning, rubbish disposal or swipe cards.' "Whether the landlord's procedural objections justified dismissal of the tenants' application or exclusion of evidence."]
Ratio Decidendi
The landlord breached s 63 of the Residential Tenancies Act 2010 (NSW) by failing to repair the air conditioner for the whole three months that the tenants lived in the premises, despite noting it was to be repaired. Blaming the strata corporation or cost of repairs did not excuse the breach, and the use of fans was not a comparable solution. Given the significant rent, the ongoing lack of a promised amenity, the tenants' impact, and the landlord's related conduct including failure to lodge the bond within time and requiring excessive rent in advance, the breach justified termination under s 103. The tenants therefore did not abandon the tenancy and were not liable for the break fee. The...
Court Disposition
The tenants' application was allowed in part and the landlord's application was dismissed.
Orders
- ['The landlord, Chenyang Yan, is to pay the tenants, Ziyu Yan and Jiaming Lin and Liang Wang, the sum of $2,210.00 on or before 06-Nov-2023 as compensation under s 187(1)(d) for breach of s 63.' 'The Rental Bond Services is directed to pay the tenants the whole bond plus interest of Rental Bond number T558673-1.'...
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment