Subway Vault (NSW) Pty Ltd v Gogo MD Pty Ltd [2023] NSWCATCD 118

Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Subway Vault (NSW) Pty Ltd v Gogo MD Pty Ltd [2023] NSWCATCD 118 Hearing dates: 14 March 2023 Date of orders: 08 August 2023 Decision date: 08 August 2023 Jurisdiction: Consumer and Commercial Division Before: G Sarginson, Senior Member Decision: (1) The proceedings are dismissed as the Tribunal has no jurisdiction under the Retail Leases Act 1994 (NSW). (2) Any costs application is to be determined as follows: (a) Costs applicant is to file with the Tribunal and serve on the costs respondent all costs submissions and documents by 14 days from the date of this decision. (b) Costs respondent is to file with the Tribunal and serve on the costs applicant all costs submissions and documents by 28 days from the date of this decision. (c) Costs applicant is to file with the Tribunal and serve on the costs respondent all submissions in reply by 35 days from the date of this decision. (d) The costs submissions of the parties are to include whether or not they agree to the issue of costs being determined on the papers and without a further oral hearing and if not, why not. (f) Subject to consideration of the submissions of the parties the Tribunal may determine it appropriate to dispense with a further oral hearing and determine the issue of costs on the papers in accordance with s 50 (2) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW). (g) Either party has liberty in writing to apply to the Tribunal to vary or extend the timetable for costs submissions and documents. Any such application must be made by no later than the day prior to the date of compliance with the timetable obligation. Catchwords: LEASES AND TENANCIES---Retail Leases Act 1994 (NSW)---Jurisdiction of Tribunal---Retail Shop Premises---Entertainment and amusement services---Definition STATUTORY INTERPRETATION---Retail Leases Act 1994 (NSW)---Retail Shop Premises---Entertainment and amusement services---Definition Legislation Cited: Australian Consumer Law 2010 (C'th) Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) Fair Trading Act 1987 (NSW) Retail Lease Regulation 2022 (NSW) Retail Leases Act 1994 (NSW) Retail Leases Act 2003 (Vic) Cases Cited: Alcan (NT) Alumina Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Territory Revenue [2009] HCA 41; 239 CLR 27 Cooper Brookes (Wollongong) Pty Ltd v Federal Commissioner of Taxation [1981] HCA 26; (1981) 147 CLR 297 Diamond Certification Laboratories Pty Ltd v the Trust Company Ltd [2015] NSWCATCD 122 Doula Spirit Pty Ltd v Andrew Argyrou [2014] NSWCATCD 251 Eastcombe Pty Ltd v Fagersta Steels Pty Ltd [2022] VCAT 780 Fitzroy Dental Pty Ltd v Metropole Management Pty Ltd & Anor [2013] VSC 344; Hanave Pty Ltd v Nomad Sydney Pty Ltd (formerly Wine Nomad Pty Ltd) [2023] NSWSC 265 Hanave Pty Ltd v Wine Nomad Pty Ltd; Wine Nomad Pty Ltd v Hanave Pty Ltd [2022] NSWCATAP 153 Hardcore Gym Pty Ltd v Police Citizens Youth Club Ltd [2014] NSWCATCD 249 at Honings Bakery Pty. Ltd. v Cerialis Pty. Ltd [2014] NSWCATCD 87 IMCC Group (Australia) Pty Ltd v Cold Storage Pty Ltd [2017] VSCA 178 In Dee-Tech Pty Ltd v Neddam Holdings Pty Ltd [2012] NSWSC 251; (2012) 16 BPR 31,089 Iszett St Pty Ltd v Applgold Pty Ltd [2021] VCAT 174 Kim v Kim [2011] NSWADT 92 Lauven Pty Ltd & Anor v Venus Adult Shops Pty Ltd & Ors [2006] NSWADT 359 Manly Council v Malouf [2004] NSWCA 299; (2004) 61 NSWLR 394 Moweno Pty Ltd v Stratis Promotions Pty Ltd [2003] NSWCA 376 Moweno v Stratis [2002] NSWSC 1151 Project Blue Sky v ABA [1998] HCA 28; (1998) 194 CLR 355 Robin Raju & Associates Pty Ltd v Kaplan Investments Pty Ltd [2021] NSWCATACD 90 State of Victoria v Tymbook Pty Ltd [2005] VSC 267 Targeted Property Investments Pty Ltd v Look Up Technologies Pty Ltd [2022] NSWCATAP 318 Targeted Property Investments Pty Ltd v Look Up Technologies Pty Ltd (No 2) [2023] NSWSC 416 Wy Trading Pty Ltd v Wang [2012] NSWADT 190 Texts Cited: Macquarie Dictionary 8th ed Category: Principal judgment Parties: Subway Vault (NSW) Pty Ltd (Applicant) Gogo MD Pty Ltd (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: M. Bennett (Applicant)