Baltov v Casaceli [2021] NSWCATCD 91

Baltov v Casaceli [2021] NSWCATCD 91

The Tribunal held that the proposed increase to $1,750 per week was more than could be justified after considering comparable market rents, the premises' size, age, amenities, location and state of repair, the work done by the tenant, the absence of a prior increase for 12 months, and the parties' conduct. However, the tenants did not prove that there should be no increase at all. A rent increase of $150 per week to $1,650 per week was just and appropriate, with no further increase for 12 months.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 September 2021
Procedural Posture
Application Under the Residential Tenancies Act 2010 (nsw) for an Excessive Rent Increase Order / Principal Judgment
Outcome
Application allowed in part; the proposed rent increase was found excessive and a lower maximum rent was ordered.
Legal Topics
['excessive Rent' 'rent Increase' 'comparable Market Rents' 'state of Repair']
['residential Tenancy Law'] ['excessive Rent' 'rent Increase' 'comparable Market Rents' 'state of Repair']

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

Application Under the Residential Tenancies Act 2010 (nsw) for an Excessive Rent Increase Order / Principal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the proposed rent increase from $1,500 per week to $1,750 per week under an existing residential tenancy agreement was excessive under s 44(1)(a) of the Residential Tenancies Act 2010 (NSW).' 'What maximum rent should apply, and for what period, if the proposed increase was excessive.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal held that the proposed increase to $1,750 per week was more than could be justified after considering comparable market rents, the premises' size, age, amenities, location and state of repair, the work done by the tenant, the absence of a prior increase for 12 months, and the parties' conduct. However, the tenants did not prove that there should be no increase at all. A rent increase of $150 per week to $1,650 per week was just and appropriate, with no further increase for 12 months.

Court Disposition

Application allowed in part; the proposed rent increase was found excessive and a lower maximum rent was ordered.

Orders

  • ['The rent shall not exceed the sum of $1,650 per week as from 01-Oct-2021 to 01-Oct-2022.']