Stonewall Hotel Pty Ltd v Papantoniou [2017] NSWSC 964

Stonewall Hotel Pty Ltd v Papantoniou [2017] NSWSC 964

Service of the notice of exercise of option on the landlord’s solicitor in 2010 was valid because the solicitor was acting for the landlord with authority, and service in 2015 by email notified the landlord’s representatives and was valid service under the general law; therefore, both options to renew the lease were validly exercised.

Parties
Plaintiff: Stonewall Hotel Pty Ltd; First Defendant: John Papantoniou; Second Defendant: Aristotelis Papantoniou; Third Defendant: Stella Papantoniou; Fourth Defendant: Efthemia Papantoniou
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 July 2017
Procedural Posture
Principal Judgment / Final Judgment
Outcome
Declarations and orders made that the plaintiff validly exercised two options to renew the lease. Plaintiff entitled to a new lease for 4 November 2015 to 3 November 2020. Orders to be brought in within 14 days; costs to be determined.
Legal Topics
Leases, Options to Renew Lease, Service of Notice, Solicitor Authority, Conveyancing Act 1919 (nsw) S 170
Equity Leases Options to Renew Lease Service of Notice Solicitor Authority Conveyancing Act 1919 (nsw) S 170

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 3 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Stonewall Hotel Pty Ltd

Plaintiff

John Papantoniou

First Defendant

Aristotelis Papantoniou

Second Defendant

Stella Papantoniou

Third Defendant

Efthemia Papantoniou

Fourth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Principal Judgment / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff validly exercised the options to renew the lease in 2010 and 2015
  2. 2 Whether service of the notice of exercise of option on the landlord’s solicitor was effective service for the purpose of the lease
  3. 3 Whether s 170 of the Conveyancing Act 1919 (NSW) provided the exclusive method for service of such notices

Ratio Decidendi

Service of the notice of exercise of option on the landlord’s solicitor in 2010 was valid because the solicitor was acting for the landlord with authority, and service in 2015 by email notified the landlord’s representatives and was valid service under the general law; therefore, both options to renew the lease were validly exercised.

Court Disposition

Declarations and orders made that the plaintiff validly exercised two options to renew the lease. Plaintiff entitled to a new lease for 4 November 2015 to 3 November 2020. Orders to be brought in within 14 days; costs to be determined.

Orders

  • Declarations that plaintiff validly exercised first and second options to renew the lease
  • Order requiring defendants to grant new lease for 4 November 2015 to 3 November 2020 and arrange registration