In the Primary RE case, the new RE sought relief from forfeiture of leases terminated following breaches of the lease by the former RE. The landlord argued that the former RE would have been estopped from seeking relief from forfeiture because it had failed to make an application for relief from forfeiture following service of […]
Archive | Property / leasing RSS feed for this archive
Does the replacement RE take its claim subject to equities against the old RE? Primary RE Ltd v Great Southern Property Holdings Ltd & Ors [2011] VSC 242
Does a right to seek relief from forfeiture transfer under ss 601FS and 601FT of the Corporations Act? Primary RE Ltd v Great Southern Property Holdings Ltd & Ors [2011] VSC 242
July 8, 2011
Primary RE replaced the old Great Southern RE of the schemes in this litigation. Under s 601FS of the Corporations Act: If the responsible entity of a registered scheme changes, the rights, obligations and liabilities of the former responsible entity in relation to the scheme become rights, obligations and liabilities of the new responsible entity. […]
Exercising an option out of time: Weemah Park Pty Ltd v Glenlaton Investments Pty Ltd [2011] QCA 150 (24 June 2011)
July 5, 2011
In a recent Queensland Court of Appeal decision, the tenant had purported to exercise its option out of time. The Court upheld the primary judge’s finding that: the purported exercise of an option out of time constituted an offer by the tenant to enter a new lease on the same terms as the option; and […]
Service of a s 146 notice on sub-tenants – Primary RE Ltd v Great Southern Property Holdings Ltd & Ors [2011] VSC 242
July 5, 2011
Primary RE argued that a landlord was required to serve notice under s 146 of the PLA on sub-tenants (in this case, the Growers) because the definition of lessee in s 146(5) of the PLA includes a derivative under-lessee and the persons deriving title under a lessee. The Court found that, in the absence of […]
“Reasonable time” in a s 146 notice – Primary RE Ltd v Great Southern Property Holdings Ltd & Ors [2011] VSC 242
July 4, 2011
Section 146 of the PLA states that (emphasis added): (1) A right of re-entry or forfeiture under any proviso or stipulation in a lease or otherwise arising by operation of law for a breach of any covenant or condition in the lease, including a breach amounting to repudiation, shall not be enforceable, by action or […]
New blog – The Property Law Blog
July 4, 2011
My good friend Robert Hay has just started a property law blog here. If you follow my blog, you may also find Robert’s interesting.
Termination of leases and relief from forfeiture – Lontav Pty Ltd v Pineross Custodial Services [2011] VSC 278
June 29, 2011
In the decision of Lontav Pty Ltd v Pineross Custodial Services [2011] VSC 278, handed down last Thursday, a tenant applied to the Supreme Court seeking orders that the landlord of a retail premises lease had wrongly purported to terminate the lease and, in the alternative, sought relief from forfeiture. There are a couple of […]
Amendment to Retail Leases Act 2003 – definition of “accountant”
June 27, 2011
The definition of “accountant” in s 3 of the RLA will soon be changed. It currently reads as follows: accountant means a member of— (a) the Institute of Chartered Accountants in Australia; or (b) CPA Australia (ACN 008 392 452); or (c) the National Institute of Accountants; The new definition will change subsection (c) to […]
Is the breach capable of remedy? Primary RE Ltd v Great Southern Property Holdings Ltd & Ors [2011] VSC 242
June 27, 2011
The s 146 notices served on the former RE cited a failure to tend and maintain the plantations on the leased land in breach of the leases. The receivers of the land owning company argued that a failure to maintain is not a breach capable of remedy. Primary RE argued the contrary position, stating that […]
Part 2 – Cross-referencing error in s 62 of the Retail Leases Act 2003 (Vic)
June 21, 2011
In an earlier post on this blog I noted that there was a cross-referencing error in s 62 of the Retail Leases Act 2003 (Vic). That error has now been corrected by a the Statute Law Revision Act 2011 (Vic) (see item 81 of the Schedule), which came into force today. Thanks to Vanessa for pointing this […]

July 12, 2011
0 Comments