Skiwing Pty Ltd v Trust Company Ltd (RLD) [2010] NSWADTAP 73

Skiwing Pty Ltd v Trust Company Ltd (RLD) [2010] NSWADTAP 73

The Tribunal did not err in law by treating audited outgoings statements as prima facie evidence of properly and reasonably incurred outgoings, by refusing further document production absent objective grounds, or in its construction of the relevant statutory scheme; nor were any errors so significant as to warrant intervention on appeal. The appeal was accordingly dismissed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 November 2010
Procedural Posture
Internal Appeal / Appeal Panel Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
['retail Leases' 'outgoings' 'evidence' 'tribunal Procedure']
['commercial Law' 'administrative Law'] ['retail Leases' 'outgoings' 'evidence' 'tribunal Procedure']

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

Internal Appeal / Appeal Panel Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether contributions to outgoings paid by the lessee were properly and reasonably incurred by the lessor under the Retail Leases Act 1994' 'Whether the Tribunal erred in its treatment of audited outgoings statements and in refusing to require further evidence from the lessor' "Whether the calculation of lessee's contributions was correct in light of non-contributing tenants"]

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal did not err in law by treating audited outgoings statements as prima facie evidence of properly and reasonably incurred outgoings, by refusing further document production absent objective grounds, or in its construction of the relevant statutory scheme; nor were any errors so significant as to warrant intervention on appeal. The appeal was accordingly dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • ['The appeal is dismissed.' "Unless within 21 days of the decision the Appellant files and serves submissions arguing to the contrary, it should then be required to pay the Respondent's costs of the appeal, as agreed or assessed." "If such submissions are filed, the Respondent is to file and serve within a further...