Antonaras v NSW Land and Housing Corporation [2022] NSWCATCD 54

Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Antonaras v NSW Land and Housing Corporation [2022] NSWCATCD 54 Hearing dates: 15 March 2022 Date of orders: 29 April 2022 Decision date: 29 April 2022 Jurisdiction: Consumer and Commercial Division Before: J Alder, General Member Decision: 1. The Tribunal declines to make further orders. Catchwords: LEASES AND TENANCIES - Finality of consent orders – Estoppel – Rent reduction-compensation - Non-economic loss - Right to quiet enjoyment Legislation Cited: Residential Tenancies Act 2010 (NSW) Residential Tenancies Regulation 2019 (NSW) Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW) Cases Cited: Roberts v NSW Aboriginal Housing Office [2017] NSWCATAP 9 Makowska v St George Community Housing Ltd [2020] NSWCATAP 159 Makowska v St George Community Housing Ltd [2021] NSWSC 287 Makowska v St George Community Housing Ltd [2021] NSWCA 249 Baltic Shipping Co v Dillon [1993] HCA 4 Moore v Scenic Tours Pty Ltd [2002] HCA 17 Texts Cited: Nil Category: Principal judgment Parties: Toula Antonaras (applicant) Representation: Applicant (Self-represented)

Solicitor: Legal Services Branch, NSW Land and Housing Corporation (Respondent) File Number(s): SH 21/41005 Publication restriction: Nil

REASONS FOR DECISION

Summary 1. On 15 March 2022, the matter was listed for hearing to determine whether the applicant, Ms Antonaras (tenant) was prevented from pursuing claims brought for economic and non-economic loss (Compensation Claims) on the basis such claims were resolved by consent orders made by the Tribunal on 30 November 2021 (Consent Orders). 2. For the reasons that follow, I have determined that the Consent Orders were final and included all claims in the tenant's original application (as amended) and the tenant is consequently estopped from re-agitating the Compensation Claims. Notwithstanding, I have also considered the merits of the Compensation Claims and have determined that the tenant has not discharged her onus of proof that the respondent (landlord) is liable for the loss the tenant says she has suffered flowing from the Compensation Claims.