Stevens v SPL Living Pty Ltd [2023] NSWCATCD 160

Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Stevens v SPL Living Pty Ltd [2023] NSWCATCD 160 Hearing dates: 8 November 2023 Date of orders: 14 December 2023 Decision date: 14 December 2023 Jurisdiction: Consumer and Commercial Division Before: S Hanstein, General Member Decision: 1. The Tribunal declares that the agreements between the applicants and the respondent in respect of the rooms in the premises at 16 Eurimbla Street, Thornton are not residential tenancy agreements to which this Act applies. 2. The Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to hear and determine the balance of the application. Catchwords: LEASES AND TENANCIES — Residential Tenancies Act 2010 (NSW) — Whether residential tenancy agreement exists — Whether occupant is a boarder or lodger Legislation Cited: Residential Tenancies Act 2010 Cases Cited: Pupuke v Stratford [2016] NSWCATAP 7; Shapkin v The University of Sydney [2023] NSWCATAP 2 Texts Cited: None Category: Principal judgment Parties: Rachael Stevens and Rod Stainton (applicants) SPL Living Pty Ltd (respondent) Representation: Applicants in person Mr Ryan for the respondent File Number(s): 2023/00394417 (previously RT 23/24130) Publication restriction: Nil

Reasons for decision 1. The applicants claim they were tenants of the premises under a residential tenancy agreement and they were unlawfully removed from premises. They seek an order declaring that the agreement was a residential tenancy agreement under the Residential Tenancies Act 2010 ("Act") and compensation, including because they had to pay for alternate accommodation, they lost belongings and suffered emotional distress. 2. The first issue to be determined is whether there was a residential tenancy agreement between the applicants (as tenants) and the respondent (as landlord). If there is no residential tenancy agreement, the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to hear and determine the claim for compensation. 3. Both parties provided documentary material in support of their cases and gave oral evidence. I have considered that material in reaching my decision.