Dorante-Day, Elvianna v Martin [2012] NSWSC 714

Dorante-Day, Elvianna v Martin [2012] NSWSC 714

The plaintiffs were afforded procedural fairness in the Tribunal hearing. They were given a reasonable opportunity to present their case and to make submissions. The Tribunal Member followed appropriate procedures and the consent orders corresponded to the parties' agreement. As such, judicial review under s 69 of the Supreme Court Act 1970 and relief under s 65 of the Consumer, Trader & Tenancy Tribunal Act 2001 were not warranted.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 June 2012
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review and Statutory Application / Final Judgment at First Instance
Outcome
All applications dismissed; Tribunal decision affirmed; costs ordered against plaintiffs as specified.
Legal Topics
['judicial Review' 'procedural Fairness' 'residential Tenancy Termination' 'consent Orders']
['administrative Law' 'tenancy Law'] ['judicial Review' 'procedural Fairness' 'residential Tenancy Termination' 'consent 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 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review and Statutory Application / Final Judgment at First Instance

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the plaintiffs were denied procedural fairness in the Tribunal proceedings' 'Whether judicial review should be granted under s 69 of the Supreme Court Act 1970' 'Whether relief could be granted under s 65 of the Consumer, Trader & Tenancy Tribunal Act 2001']

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiffs were afforded procedural fairness in the Tribunal hearing. They were given a reasonable opportunity to present their case and to make submissions. The Tribunal Member followed appropriate procedures and the consent orders corresponded to the parties' agreement. As such, judicial review under s 69 of the Supreme Court Act 1970 and relief under s 65 of the Consumer, Trader & Tenancy Tribunal Act 2001 were not warranted.

Court Disposition

All applications dismissed; Tribunal decision affirmed; costs ordered against plaintiffs as specified.

Orders

  • ['The application for judicial review under s 69 of the Supreme Court Act fails.' 'The application pursuant to s 65 of the Consumer, Trader & Tenancy Tribunal Act fails.' "The decision of Tribunal member O'Keeffe dated 26 May 2011 is affirmed." 'The summons filed 4 August 2011 is dismissed.' "The plaintiffs are to...