Wong v Azzi [2019] NSWCATAP 291

Wong v Azzi [2019] NSWCATAP 291

The tenant identified no question of law and failed to show that he may have suffered a substantial miscarriage of justice. The Tribunal was entitled to reject his hearsay and inconsistent evidence that keys were returned on 10 April 2019, particularly given the absence of contemporaneous records, the inconsistency with his own emails, and the logic of events. The alleged new evidence about his former wife's lease was irrelevant to whether the tenancy had been legally terminated by return of the keys. No discretionary basis for granting leave was established.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 December 2019
Procedural Posture
Residential Tenancy Appeal Concerning Rental Arrears / Appeal Panel Appeal From Civil and Administrative Tribunal, Consumer and Commercial Division Decision of 29 August 2019
Outcome
Leave to appeal on grounds other than a question of law refused; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['rental Arrears' 'breach of Covenant to Pay Rent' 'leave to Appeal' 'question of Law' 'weight of Evidence' 'new Evidence']
['landlord and Tenant' 'residential Tenancy' 'civil Procedure'] ['rental Arrears' 'breach of Covenant to Pay Rent' 'leave to Appeal' 'question of Law' 'weight of Evidence' 'new Evidence']

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

Residential Tenancy Appeal Concerning Rental Arrears / Appeal Panel Appeal From Civil and Administrative Tribunal, Consumer and Commercial Division Decision of 29 August 2019

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the tenant raised any question of law on appeal.' 'Whether leave to appeal should be granted on grounds other than a question of law.' "Whether the Tribunal erred in rejecting the tenant's case that the keys were returned on 10 April 2019 and that he was not liable for rent thereafter." "Whether the Tribunal's decision was not fair or equitable, against the weight of evidence, or affected by significant new evidence not reasonably available at the hearing."]

Ratio Decidendi

The tenant identified no question of law and failed to show that he may have suffered a substantial miscarriage of justice. The Tribunal was entitled to reject his hearsay and inconsistent evidence that keys were returned on 10 April 2019, particularly given the absence of contemporaneous records, the inconsistency with his own emails, and the logic of events. The alleged new evidence about his former wife's lease was irrelevant to whether the tenancy had been legally terminated by return of the keys. No discretionary basis for granting leave was established.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal on grounds other than a question of law refused; appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal on grounds other than a question of law refused.' 'Appeal dismissed.']