Mae v STM123 No.11 Pty Ltd [2022] NSWCATAP 61

Mae v STM123 No.11 Pty Ltd [2022] NSWCATAP 61

The appellant failed to provide evidence or a transcript as ordered, did not demonstrate that the Tribunal's decision was against the weight of evidence, nor that a substantial miscarriage of justice occurred. The finding that the termination notice was not retaliatory was open on the evidence and refusal of leave to appeal was warranted.

Parties
Appellant: Garnet Mae; Respondent: STM123 No.11 Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 March 2022
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Decision of Appeal Panel
Outcome
Leave to appeal refused. Appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
Termination of Tenancy, Retaliatory Eviction, Leave to Appeal, Appeal Procedure
Residential Tenancy Law Termination of Tenancy Retaliatory Eviction Leave to Appeal Appeal Procedure

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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Garnet Mae

Appellant

STM123 No.11 Pty Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Decision of Appeal Panel

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether notice of termination was retaliatory under s115 of the Residential Tenancies Act 2010 (NSW)
  2. 2 Whether leave to appeal should be granted on grounds of miscarriage of justice or decision against weight of evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant failed to provide evidence or a transcript as ordered, did not demonstrate that the Tribunal's decision was against the weight of evidence, nor that a substantial miscarriage of justice occurred. The finding that the termination notice was not retaliatory was open on the evidence and refusal of leave to appeal was warranted.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal refused. Appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • Leave to appeal is refused.
  • The appeal is dismissed.