Kozak v Godfrey [2024] NSWCATAP 26

Kozak v Godfrey [2024] NSWCATAP 26

The appellant did not establish that the Tribunal Member misled him about the consent orders. The transcript showed that the Member read and explained the orders, including termination on 29 November 2023, possession being given on that date, and the daily occupation fee if he had not moved out, and the appellant confirmed his agreement and asked no questions. There was therefore no demonstrated error of law, denial of procedural fairness, legal unreasonableness, or basis for leave to appeal. Because the appeal had no merit, there was no utility in extending time, and the extension of time and leave to appeal were refused and the appeal dismissed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 February 2024
Procedural Posture
Internal Appeal in Residential Tenancy Proceedings / Appeal Panel Decision on Extension of Time, Leave to Appeal and Appeal
Outcome
Leave to extend time to appeal refused; leave to appeal refused; appeal dismissed; Tribunal orders varied under s.188 of the Residential Tenancies Act.
Legal Topics
['consent Orders' 'termination of Residential Tenancy Agreement' 'occupation Fee' 'extension of Time to Appeal' 'leave to Appeal' 'question of Law' 'procedural Fairness' 'legal Unreasonableness']
['residential Tenancies' 'civil and Administrative Appeals'] ['consent Orders' 'termination of Residential Tenancy Agreement' 'occupation Fee' 'extension of Time to Appeal' 'leave to Appeal' 'question of Law' 'procedural Fairness' 'legal Unreasonableness']

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 / Appeal Panel Decision on Extension of Time, Leave to Appeal and Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the appellant established error on a question of law in relation to consent orders terminating the residential tenancy agreement.' "Whether leave to appeal should be granted on the basis that the Tribunal's decision was not fair and equitable." 'Whether time to appeal should be extended where the appeal was lodged out of time.' 'Whether the Tribunal Member misled the appellant as to the nature and effect of the consent orders.']

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant did not establish that the Tribunal Member misled him about the consent orders. The transcript showed that the Member read and explained the orders, including termination on 29 November 2023, possession being given on that date, and the daily occupation fee if he had not moved out, and the appellant confirmed his agreement and asked no questions. There was therefore no demonstrated error of law, denial of procedural fairness, legal unreasonableness, or basis for leave to appeal. Because the appeal had no merit, there was no utility in extending time, and the extension of time and leave to appeal were refused and the appeal dismissed.

Court Disposition

Leave to extend time to appeal refused; leave to appeal refused; appeal dismissed; Tribunal orders varied under s.188 of the Residential Tenancies Act.

Orders

  • ['Leave to extend time to appeal is refused.' 'Leave to appeal is refused.' 'The appeal is dismissed.' 'Pursuant to s.188 of the RT Act the Appeal Panel varies the orders of the Tribunal made on 29 August 2023 in RT23/36948 to be: The Residential Tenancy Agreement is terminated on 21 February 2024 and possession is...