Originally posted on Paul Duggan:
VCAT’s no costs presumption is more elastic in some parts of the tribunal than in others. In building cases, the losers commonly pay the winners’ costs. In retail tenancies disputes the losers very rarely do. But the winner paying the loser’s costs? Calderbanks and their equivalents aside, it is almost unheard…

Justice Croft in the Supreme Court yesterday overturned the controversial decision in Serene Hotels Pty Ltd v Epping Hotels Pty Ltd (Retail Tenancies) [2014] VCAT 97. The decision at first instance had two important aspects: it suggested that the ‘profits method’ of determining the rent was prohibited by s 37(2) of the Retail Leases Act […]

Originally posted on Robert Hay KC Blog:
Leases commonly permit a landlord to terminate a lease if the landlord intends to demolish the building located on the leased premises. Section 56 of the Retail Leases Act 2003 (Vic) implies terms into a retail premises lease that provides for the termination of lease on the grounds…

Those following the debate on the operation of s 52 of the RLA and s 251 of the Building Act 1993 (Vic) may be aware that the Victorian Small Business Commissioner made an application to the President of VCAT seeking an opinion on the landlord’s ability to pass on the act and/or cost of compliance with those […]

In the recent decision of Wang v Orion Holdings Australia Pty Ltd (Building and Property) [2014] VCAT 812, VCAT held that premises let as student accommodation was a retail premises, even though most guests stayed for six months. In Stringer and Ors v Gilandos Pty Ltd [2012] VSC 361, discussed here, Croft J held that a lease of […]

A number of VCAT decisions in recent years have found that: s 52(2) of the Retail Leases Act 2003 (Vic) creates a ‘baseline’ standard of repair that the landlord cannot contract out of; but that the parties can agree to put and maintain the premises in a higher standard than that required by s 52(2). […]

There have been four developments for the leasing community over recent weeks: leave was granted to appeal the decision in Serene Hotels v Epping Hotels; a hearing was scheduled for the Small Business Commissioner’s application for advice from the President of VCAT; the Minister for Small Business has made a new determination excluding certain leases […]

Originally posted on Equity, Trusts and More:
It’s been almost five years since the High Court confirmed that Australian law does not recognise a standalone legal doctrine of waiver, Agricultural and Rural Finance Pty Ltd v Gardiner (2008) 238 CLR 570.  Waiver is really a shorthand description of the result of the doctrines of election, estoppel,…

Originally posted on Robert Hay KC Blog:
In Ireland v Subway Systems Australia Pty Ltd and Subway Realty Pty Ltd [2012] VCAT 1061 a tenant contended if an agreement (which it contended was a licence) was held to be a lease then the dispute had to be determined by an arbitrator pursuant to an arbitration clause…