Skydale v Maher [2000] NSWSC 644

Skydale v Maher [2000] NSWSC 644

The lease was validly forfeited for non-payment as at 17 March 2000: minimum rent, reimbursement rent (rates and land tax), and legal costs were due and sufficiently demanded in accordance with the lease and statute. Payments made by the lessee were inadequate to discharge these liabilities, and purported set-offs or credits could not be substantiated as relating to the current lease period. Skydale was therefore entitled to possession, subject to unresolved issues in the defendant's cross-claim.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 July 2000
Procedural Posture
Possession Claim (common Law) / Interlocutory; Judgment on Entitlement to Possession, Further Matters Adjourned
Outcome
Possession granted in favour of Skydale, subject to unresolved cross-claim issues; no formal orders made, matter adjourned for determination of outstanding points.
Legal Topics
['forfeiture of Lease' 'non Payment of Rent' 'reimbursement Rent' 'demand for Payment' 'relief Against Forfeiture']
['property Law' 'landlord and Tenant'] ['forfeiture of Lease' 'non Payment of Rent' 'reimbursement Rent' 'demand for Payment' 'relief Against Forfeiture']

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

Possession Claim (common Law) / Interlocutory; Judgment on Entitlement to Possession, Further Matters Adjourned

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether lease was forfeited for non-payment of rent and other moneys' 'Whether sums paid by defendant should be credited as rent or under reimbursement obligations' 'Whether valid demand for payment of reimbursement rent/rates/taxes was made under lease' 'Whether legal costs and other expenses formed part of moneys due under lease']

Ratio Decidendi

The lease was validly forfeited for non-payment as at 17 March 2000: minimum rent, reimbursement rent (rates and land tax), and legal costs were due and sufficiently demanded in accordance with the lease and statute. Payments made by the lessee were inadequate to discharge these liabilities, and purported set-offs or credits could not be substantiated as relating to the current lease period. Skydale was therefore entitled to possession, subject to unresolved issues in the defendant's cross-claim.

Court Disposition

Possession granted in favour of Skydale, subject to unresolved cross-claim issues; no formal orders made, matter adjourned for determination of outstanding points.

Orders

  • []