Daimantis v Woods [2008] NSWADT 204

Daimantis v Woods [2008] NSWADT 204

The photographs showed the premises to be a factory for assembly of aluminium profiles with no display area or actual displays, and the Applicant admitted the premises were used for storage of windows and profiles while a showroom was elsewhere. The predominant use was therefore not a building supply shop, the premises fell outside the scheduled retail use, and the Tribunal had no jurisdiction.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 July 2008
Procedural Posture
Retail Leases Division Application / Interlocutory Matter
Outcome
Application dismissed, no order as to costs.
Legal Topics
['retail Leases Act 1994' 'scheduled Retail Shop Use' 'building Supplies Shop' 'predominant Use of Premises' 'application for Interim 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

Retail Leases Division Application / Interlocutory Matter

  1. 1 ['Whether the premises at 7/59 Moxon Road, Punchbowl were used for a scheduled purpose under the Retail Leases Act 1994, specifically as a building supplies shop.' 'Whether the Tribunal had jurisdiction to determine the application.']

Ratio Decidendi

The photographs showed the premises to be a factory for assembly of aluminium profiles with no display area or actual displays, and the Applicant admitted the premises were used for storage of windows and profiles while a showroom was elsewhere. The predominant use was therefore not a building supply shop, the premises fell outside the scheduled retail use, and the Tribunal had no jurisdiction.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed, no order as to costs.

Orders

  • ['Application dismissed, no order as to costs.']