Tonini & anor v Whitehouse Bakery Pty Ltd & ors [2007] NSWADT 161

Tonini & anor v Whitehouse Bakery Pty Ltd & ors [2007] NSWADT 161

The respondents were obliged to restore the premises to the standard at the commencement of the lease dated 1 January 2003, as improved by either party and subject to fair wear and tear. Only those restoration and cleaning costs that bring the premises to this standard, and which are proven by cogent evidence, are recoverable. The applicants were also entitled to one month's rent due to respondents' failure to give proper notice, but not entitled to expenses that were for improvements or insufficiently evidenced.

Parties
Applicant: Silvano Tonini and Liliana Tonini; First Respondent: Whitehouse Bakery Pty Ltd; Second Respondent: Sante Deidda; Second Respondent: Rosa Deidda
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 July 2007
Procedural Posture
Claim for Payment of Money / Principal Matter/decision
Outcome
Applicants partly successful
Legal Topics
Retail Leases, Lease Restoration and Cleaning Obligations, Rent Claims
Property Law Commercial Law Retail Leases Lease Restoration and Cleaning Obligations Rent Claims

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Silvano Tonini and Liliana Tonini

Applicant

Whitehouse Bakery Pty Ltd

First Respondent

Sante Deidda

Second Respondent

Rosa Deidda

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Claim for Payment of Money / Principal Matter/decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondents are liable under the lease for costs of restoration and cleaning of the premises
  2. 2 Whether the applicants are entitled to claim one month's rent in lieu of notice
  3. 3 Whether the expenses claimed exceed the respondents’ obligations under the lease

Ratio Decidendi

The respondents were obliged to restore the premises to the standard at the commencement of the lease dated 1 January 2003, as improved by either party and subject to fair wear and tear. Only those restoration and cleaning costs that bring the premises to this standard, and which are proven by cogent evidence, are recoverable. The applicants were also entitled to one month's rent due to respondents' failure to give proper notice, but not entitled to expenses that were for improvements or insufficiently evidenced.

Court Disposition

Applicants partly successful

Orders

  • The Respondents must pay the Applicants the sum of $11,496.52.
  • No order as to costs unless written submissions are filed within 28 days.