Evangelos Rouvinetis v CTTT & Anor [2007] NSWSC 964

Evangelos Rouvinetis v CTTT & Anor [2007] NSWSC 964

The plaintiff did not demonstrate any error of law or denial of procedural fairness. The orders sought in the Tribunal were specific performance or declaratory orders based on an alleged breach of a residential tenancy agreement, which the Tribunal held it had no jurisdiction to make. In any event, the Housing Act 2001 (NSW) permits the New South Wales Land and Housing Corporation to act in the name of the Department of Housing. The plaintiff also failed to show that he was denied a reasonable opportunity to present his case, and his remaining assertions did not establish a basis for relief.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 September 2007
Procedural Posture
Appeal or Review From Decision of the Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal / Summons Filed 14 May 2007 Dismissed
Outcome
The plaintiff's summons filed 14 May 2007 was dismissed and the plaintiff was ordered to pay the second defendant's costs as agreed or assessed.
Legal Topics
['consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal Jurisdiction' 'error of Law' 'procedural Fairness' 'name of Defendant' 'specific Performance and Declaratory Orders']
['administrative Law' 'residential Tenancies' 'public Housing'] ['consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal Jurisdiction' 'error of Law' 'procedural Fairness' 'name of Defendant' 'specific Performance and Declaratory Orders']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Appeal or Review From Decision of the Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal / Summons Filed 14 May 2007 Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal made an error of law in dismissing the plaintiff's application for want of jurisdiction." 'Whether the plaintiff was denied natural justice or procedural fairness before the Tribunal.' 'Whether the New South Wales Land and Housing Corporation was permitted to act in the name of the Department of Housing.' 'Whether the plaintiff\'s ground described as abuse of authority by "impotentia excusat legem" was made out.']

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff did not demonstrate any error of law or denial of procedural fairness. The orders sought in the Tribunal were specific performance or declaratory orders based on an alleged breach of a residential tenancy agreement, which the Tribunal held it had no jurisdiction to make. In any event, the Housing Act 2001 (NSW) permits the New South Wales Land and Housing Corporation to act in the name of the Department of Housing. The plaintiff also failed to show that he was denied a reasonable opportunity to present his case, and his remaining assertions did not establish a basis for relief.

Court Disposition

The plaintiff's summons filed 14 May 2007 was dismissed and the plaintiff was ordered to pay the second defendant's costs as agreed or assessed.

Orders

  • ["The plaintiff's summons filed 14 May 2007 is dismissed." "The plaintiff is to pay the second defendant's costs as agreed or assessed."]