C&C Investment Properties Pty Ltd v Yichen Sydney Pty Ltd [2021] NSWCATCD 69

C&C Investment Properties Pty Ltd v Yichen Sydney Pty Ltd [2021] NSWCATCD 69

The Tribunal had jurisdiction because the claims were retail tenancy claims brought within time. Yichen held over under the lease and breached it by failing to pay rent and interest and by failing to remove stock and equipment and make good the premises. The guarantors were liable because the guarantee of the lessee's obligations to pay rent and damages ran with the land and touched and concerned the land, so the applicant as transferee of the reversion could enforce it. Ms Zheng's statements about being forced by Yongmei Mao did not provide a defence because there was no evidence that the original lessor was party to or knew of that conduct.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 June 2021
Procedural Posture
Retail Leases Application / Contested Hearing by Video Conference; Principal Judgment
Outcome
Application allowed; respondents ordered to pay the applicant $100,423.99 immediately.
Legal Topics
['arrears of Rent' 'damages for Breach of Make Good Obligation' 'guarantor Liability' 'covenants Running With Land' 'hearing in Absence']
['leases and Tenancies' 'retail Leases'] ['arrears of Rent' 'damages for Breach of Make Good Obligation' 'guarantor Liability' 'covenants Running With Land' 'hearing in Absence']

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 Leases Application / Contested Hearing by Video Conference; Principal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['whether the proceedings as against Yichen Sydney Pty Ltd and Yongmei Mao should be heard in their absence' 'whether the applicant is entitled to relief against Yichen Sydney Pty Ltd' 'whether the applicant is entitled to relief against Yongmei Mao and Yang Chen (also known as Elaine Zheng)']

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal had jurisdiction because the claims were retail tenancy claims brought within time. Yichen held over under the lease and breached it by failing to pay rent and interest and by failing to remove stock and equipment and make good the premises. The guarantors were liable because the guarantee of the lessee's obligations to pay rent and damages ran with the land and touched and concerned the land, so the applicant as transferee of the reversion could enforce it. Ms Zheng's statements about being forced by Yongmei Mao did not provide a defence because there was no evidence that the original lessor was party to or knew of that conduct.

Court Disposition

Application allowed; respondents ordered to pay the applicant $100,423.99 immediately.

Orders

  • ['The respondents Yichen Sydney Pty Ltd, Yongmei Mao and Yang Chen (also known as Elaine Zheng) are to pay the applicant, C&C Investment Properties Pty Ltd, the sum of $100,423.99 immediately.']