Ticehurst v Cross [2005] NSWSC 574

Ticehurst v Cross [2005] NSWSC 574

The proceedings should not be struck out or transferred because, despite there being a retail tenancy dispute and no prior mediation, the court was satisfied on the evidence that mediation was unlikely to resolve the dispute and the interests of justice required retaining the matter in the Supreme Court given the stage of proceedings and incurred costs.

Parties
Plaintiff: Maurice Patrick Ticehurst; Plaintiff: Beverley Anne Ticehurst; Defendant: David Michael Cross
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 June 2005
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion (civil) / Interlocutory Application Prior to Assessment of Damages
Outcome
Notice of motion dismissed.
Legal Topics
Retail Tenancy Dispute, Jurisdiction, Mediation Requirements, Transfer to Tribunal, Assessment of Damages
Property Law Retail Leasing Retail Tenancy Dispute Jurisdiction Mediation Requirements Transfer to Tribunal Assessment of Damages

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Maurice Patrick Ticehurst

Plaintiff

Beverley Anne Ticehurst

Plaintiff

David Michael Cross

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Notice of Motion (civil) / Interlocutory Application Prior to Assessment of Damages

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the proceedings involve a 'retail tenancy dispute' under the Retail Leases Act
  2. 2 Whether mediation is required or likely to resolve the dispute under s 68 of the Act
  3. 3 Whether the proceedings should be transferred to the Administrative Decisions Tribunal under s 75 of the Act

Ratio Decidendi

The proceedings should not be struck out or transferred because, despite there being a retail tenancy dispute and no prior mediation, the court was satisfied on the evidence that mediation was unlikely to resolve the dispute and the interests of justice required retaining the matter in the Supreme Court given the stage of proceedings and incurred costs.

Court Disposition

Notice of motion dismissed.

Orders

  • The notice of motion is dismissed.
  • Costs of the motion are to be costs in the cause.