Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Interpretation of instruments - landlord and tenant - whether landlord has unfettered right to remove or withdraw the existing air-conditioning services provided to the demised premises - whether the intention of the parties, as manifested by the express terms of their contract, is inconsistent with the absolute right asserted by the landlord to remove air-conditioning services.
HOME YARDAGE (NSW) PTY LIMITED V TELADO PTY LIMITED
NG 1077 of 1997 JUDGE: BEAUMONT J. PLACE: SYDNEY DATE: 8 APRIL 1998
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NG 1077 of 1997
BETWEEN: HOME YARDAGE (NSW) PTY LIMITED
Applicant
AND: TELADO PTY LIMITED
Respondent
JUDGE: BEAUMONT J.
DATE OF ORDER: 7 APRIL 1998
WHERE MADE: SYDNEY
ORDERS: 1. Declare that upon the true construction of the Memorandum of Lease No. 2534800, and in the events that have happened, the respondent has no right to withdraw or remove the existing air-conditioning services provided to the demised premises. 2. Reserve liberty to either party to apply on such notice, if any, as a Judge may allow. 3. Leave to appeal from the declaration is granted to the respondent and the time for filing and serving the notice of appeal is extended up to and including 8 May 1998. 4. The respondent is to pay the applicant's costs of the issue that is the subject of the declaratory order. Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NG 1077 of 1997
BETWEEN: HOME YARDAGE (NSW) PTY LIMITED
Applicant
AND: TELADO PTY LIMITED
Respondent
JUDGE: BEAUMONT J.
DATE: 8 APRIL 1998
PLACE: SYDNEY
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BEAUMONT J: INTRODUCTION On 7 April 1998, I made declaratory and other orders in this matter, indicating that I would publish, as I now do, reasons today as follows. For present purposes, there is no dispute about the relevant factual background which may be summarised as follows: · In November 1996 the respondent, Telado Pty Limited ("Telado"), acquired the property known as 66 York Street, Sydney ("the property") from Howard Chia Pty Limited (Receiver and Manager Appointed) ("Chia"), subject to all existing tenancies. · Previously, in August 1996, Chia had leased part of the property to the applicant, Home Yardage (NSW) Pty Limited ("Home Yardage"), pursuant to a memorandum of lease, registered number 2534800 and dated 30 August 1996 ("the Lease").
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate