Lituma Pty Limited v Jafari [2005] NSWADTAP 37

The lease was assigned to Mrs Jafari with Lituma's consent on 26 November 2004; Clause 1(d) of the Deed constituted part of the lease and s 129(1) of the Conveyancing Act 1919 applied to any right to re-entry or forfeiture, requiring notice to Mrs Jafari before deprivation of her interest under the lease.

Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 20 July 2005
Procedural Posture: Appeal / Decision
Outcome: appeal dismissed
Legal Topics: ['assignment of Lease' 'retail Leasing' 'statutory Interpretation' 'forfeiture of Lease']

['property Law' 'commercial Law' 'administrative Law'] ['assignment of Lease' 'retail Leasing' 'statutory Interpretation' 'forfeiture of Lease']

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

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Decision

Legal Issues

1 ["Whether the lease was assigned to Mrs Jafari on 26 November 2004 with Lituma's consent" 'Whether s 129 of the Conveyancing Act 1919 applied to defaults under the Deed' 'Whether Clause 4 of the Deed operated to permit re-entry or surrender without compliance with s 129']

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

['Appeal dismissed.' "Tribunal's Order (2) varied by substituting 'comply with any of the provisions of cl.1(b), (c) or (d) of the Deed' for 'make the payments set out in cl.1(b) and (c) of the Deed on 26 November 2004 at 2pm'." "Tribunal's Order (4) varied by substituting 'at a date and time to be fixed by the...