NSW Caselaw
Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Dakin v ICC Group West Ryde Pty Ltd [2024] NSWCATAP 151 Hearing dates: 8 July 2024 Date of orders: 9 August 2024 Decision date: 09 August 2024 Jurisdiction: Appeal Panel Before: P Durack SC, Senior Member P H Molony, Senior Member Decision: (1) The appeal is allowed. (2) The order made by the Tribunal on 3 April 2024 dismissing the appellant's application is set aside, save to the extent that it dismissed the appellant's claim in respect of what was described in the Tribunal's decision as the "missing goods". (3) Save for the appellant's claim in respect of what was described in the Tribunal's decision as the "missing goods", the proceedings are remitted to the Consumer and Commercial Division for hearing and redetermination by a differently constituted Tribunal on such evidence as the parties file and serve in accordance with the directions and the rules for that hearing. Catchwords: LEASES and TENANCIES-whether a residential tenancy agreement as defined in s 13 of the Residential Tenancies Act 2010 (NSW) was entered into between the parties-claim for compensation for wrongful eviction-arrangement made between mother and son-whether legally unenforceable family arrangement APPEALS-alleged apprehended bias-whether failure by the Tribunal to apply the right test and ask itself the right questions-whether Tribunal took into account irrelevant considerations and failed to take into account relevant considerations Legislation Cited: Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act (NSW) (2013) Residential Tenancies Act 2010 (NSW) Cases Cited: Case v Frimont [2021] NSWCA 30 Corcoran v Far [2017] NSWCATAP 16 Crackin' Snack Pty Ltd v Gameking Australia Pty Ltd [2024] NSWCA 182 Ebner v Official Trustee in Bankruptcy [2000] HCA 63; 205 CLR 337 Ermogenous v Greek Orthodox Community of South Australia Inc (2002) 209 CLR 95 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Mansueta Dakin (Appellant) ICC Group West Ryde Pty Ltd (First Respondent) Harrold Dakin (Second Respondent) Representation: Counsel: B. Fogarty (Appellant) M. McGirr (Respondent)
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