Chiangwong v Dragon Phoenix Australia Pty Ltd ATF Dragon Phoenix Family Trust [2021] NSWCATAP 197

Chiangwong v Dragon Phoenix Australia Pty Ltd ATF Dragon Phoenix Family Trust [2021] NSWCATAP 197

The Appeal Panel held that the Tribunal's reasons, read fairly and in context, disclosed findings open on the evidence that there was no mutual agreement to reduce the rent and no representation by the landlord or its agent that the rent was unconditionally reduced. The Tribunal applied no incorrect legal principle, used an orthodox reasoning process, considered the evidence of both parties, and did not deny procedural fairness. The tenants did not establish an error of law or any basis for leave to appeal, including any substantial miscarriage of justice or significant new evidence not reasonably available at the original hearing.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 June 2021
Procedural Posture
Residential Tenancy Dispute Appeal / Internal Appeal to the Appeal Panel From a Decision of the Consumer and Commercial Division of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal
Outcome
Leave to appeal refused and appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['rent Arrears' 'variation of Residential Tenancy Agreement' 'covid 19 Rent Reduction' 'leave to Appeal' 'error of Law' 'substantial Miscarriage of Justice']
['residential Tenancies' 'civil Procedure' 'appeals'] ['rent Arrears' 'variation of Residential Tenancy Agreement' 'covid 19 Rent Reduction' 'leave to Appeal' 'error of Law' 'substantial Miscarriage of Justice']

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 Dispute Appeal / Internal Appeal to the Appeal Panel From a Decision of the Consumer and Commercial Division of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Tribunal made an error of law in finding that there was no binding mutual agreement to unconditionally reduce the rent to $500 per week.' 'Whether leave to appeal should be granted on the basis that the decision was not fair and equitable, was against the weight of evidence, or significant new evidence had arisen.' 'Whether issues concerning English comprehension, a typographical error in an email about arrears, or payment of the bond to the landlord affected the appeal.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Appeal Panel held that the Tribunal's reasons, read fairly and in context, disclosed findings open on the evidence that there was no mutual agreement to reduce the rent and no representation by the landlord or its agent that the rent was unconditionally reduced. The Tribunal applied no incorrect legal principle, used an orthodox reasoning process, considered the evidence of both parties, and did not deny procedural fairness. The tenants did not establish an error of law or any basis for leave to appeal, including any substantial miscarriage of justice or significant new evidence not reasonably available at the original hearing.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal refused and appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal is refused.' 'The appeal is dismissed.']