O’Neill v Henry [2009] NSWADT 254

CITATION: O'Neill v Henry [2009] NSWADT 254

DIVISION: Retail Leases Division

APPLICANT Jeffrey Raymond O'Neill

FIRST RESPONDENT Jamie Michael Raymond Henry PARTIES: SECOND RESPONDENT Stephen Paul Dykes

THIRD RESPONDENT Jennine Gay Dykes

FILE NUMBER: 085214

HEARING DATES: 16 March 2009

SUBMISSIONS CLOSED: 10 August 2009

DATE OF DECISION: 30 September 2009

BEFORE: Chesterman M - Deputy President; Ward R - Non-Judicial Member ; Griffiths G - Non-Judicial Member

LEGISLATION CITED : Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997 Retail Leases Act 1994

Attorney General of New South Wales v World Best Holdings Ltd (2005) 63 NSWLR 557 Balfour v Balfour [1919] 2 KB 571 Cohen v Cohen (1929) 42 CLR 91 CASES CITED: Galaxy Motors Pty Ltd v Carroll & Weekes [1965] NSWR 40 Jones v Padavatton [1969] 2 All ER 616 Massart v Blight (1951) 82 CLR 423 Thai Star Video Pty Ltd v Walpole [2007] NSWADT 193

APPLICANT R Murphy, solicitor

FIRST RESPONDENT In person REPRESENTATION: SECOND RESPONDENT In person

THIRD RESPONDENT S Dykes, agent

1. The Applicant's claim against the First Respondent is dismissed 2. The Applicant's claim against the Second and Third Respondents is dismissed ORDERS: 3. Unless within 21 days a party files and serves submissions showing why costs should be awarded, there will be no order as to costs in the proceedings between the Applicant and the First Respondent 4. Unless within 21 days the Applicant files and serves submissions raising arguments to the contrary, the Applicant is to pay on a party-party basis the legal costs and the disbursements incurred by the Second and Third Respondents in the proceedings between these parties 5. If submissions are filed by a party pursuant to Order 3 or Order 4, the opposing party or parties must file and serve submissions in response within a further 21 days. The Tribunal will determine the matter raised in the submissions without a hearing, pursuant to section 76 of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997.