Paparizos v St George Community Housing Ltd [2023] NSWCATAP 84

Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Paparizos v St George Community Housing Ltd [2023] NSWCATAP 84 Hearing dates: 14 March 2023 Date of orders: 24 March 2023 Decision date: 24 March 2023 Jurisdiction: Appeal Panel Before: S Westgarth, Deputy President G Burton SC, Senior Member Decision: (1) Appeal dismissed. Catchwords: APPEAL- failure to satisfy onus of proof - procedural unfairness - no error of law or other ground of appeal established. Legislation Cited: Civil & Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) Residential Tenancies Act 2010 (NSW) Category: Principal judgment Parties: Michael Paparizos (Appellant)

St George Community Housing Ltd (Respondent) Representation: Appellant (self-represented)

S Saward, Senior Tenancy Manage (Respondent) File Number(s): 2023/00008833 Publication restriction: Nil Decision under appeal Court or tribunal: New South Wales Civil & Administrative Tribunal Jurisdiction: Consumer & Commercial Division Citation: N/A Date of Decision: 9 December 2022 Before: S Hennings (General Member) File Number(s): SH 22/40322

REASONS FOR DECISION

Background 1. This appeal arises out of a decision published by the Tribunal in the Consumer & Commercial Division on 9 December 2022, by which the Tribunal made an order dismissing the Appellant's application. The Appellant is a tenant under a residential tenancy agreement in which the Respondent is the landlord. The Tribunal was exercising its jurisdiction under the Residential Tenancies Act 2010 (NSW) (the RT Act). 2. In the application the Appellant sought an order under s 187(1)(d) of the RT Act for compensation totalling $6,520.80. The application contained a description of the facts leading to the Appellant's claim as summarised below. 3. On 5 August 2022, the Appellant was driving his vehicle out of the carpark of the building in which he resides. While approaching the exit and going under the roller door, he turned and waved at a neighbour and, as he continued, the roller door started coming down automatically and hit the roof of his vehicle, damaging it. He was not able to see the roller door coming down. The application attached a quotation supplied by a repairer for the damage caused to the vehicle. The Appellant claimed that the Respondent had an obligation as a landlord to pay the above amount as compensation. 4. The application also stated that for a number of weeks prior to the incident on 5 August the exiting roller door had been kept open so as to permit entry and exit during a period in which the other roller door was out of order.