Bickerton v McSelan Holdings Pty Ltd [2019] NSWCATAP 155

Bickerton v McSelan Holdings Pty Ltd [2019] NSWCATAP 155

The appeal was dismissed because the Tribunal's evaluative assessment of a $22 per week rent reduction for twelve months and $400 compensation had an evident and intelligible justification, took into account the rent paid, the cost of bottled water, inconvenience and relevant effects of the poor water quality, and did not require mathematical calculation or more extensive reasons. The asserted omitted matters were facts relevant to quantum rather than a separate substantial argument, and leave was not warranted because the weight-of-evidence ground was not apt for the evaluative assessment and no substantial injustice was shown.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
25 June 2019
Procedural Posture
Appeal From a Civil and Administrative Tribunal Consumer and Commercial Division Residential Tenancy Decision / Appeal Panel Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['excessive Rent' 'compensation' 'reduction in Services' 'adequacy of Reasons' 'legal Unreasonableness' 'leave to Appeal' 'weight of Evidence' 'procedural Fairness']
['landlord and Tenant' 'residential Tenancies' 'administrative Law'] ['excessive Rent' 'compensation' 'reduction in Services' 'adequacy of Reasons' 'legal Unreasonableness' 'leave to Appeal' 'weight of Evidence' 'procedural Fairness']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Appeal From a Civil and Administrative Tribunal Consumer and Commercial Division Residential Tenancy Decision / Appeal Panel Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Tribunal gave inadequate reasons for the rent reduction and compensation awarded.' 'Whether the Tribunal failed to address a substantial argument advanced by the tenants.' 'Whether the award of $22 per week rent reduction and $400 compensation was legally unreasonable because it lacked an evident and intelligible justification.' 'Whether leave should be granted on the ground that the quantum assessment was against the weight of evidence.' 'Whether time should be extended for filing the Notice of Appeal one day late.']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the Tribunal's evaluative assessment of a $22 per week rent reduction for twelve months and $400 compensation had an evident and intelligible justification, took into account the rent paid, the cost of bottled water, inconvenience and relevant effects of the poor water quality, and did not require mathematical calculation or more extensive reasons. The asserted omitted matters were facts relevant to quantum rather than a separate substantial argument, and leave was not warranted because the weight-of-evidence ground was not apt for the evaluative assessment and no substantial injustice was shown.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Time extended for filing the Notice of Appeal.' 'Appeal dismissed.']