Loretta Caelli v Robert Cant [2014] NSWCATCD 193

Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Loretta Caelli v Robert Cant [2014] NSWCATCD 193 Hearing dates: 11 September 2014 Decision date: 02 October 2014 Before: J Levingston, General Member Decision: 1The respondent is to pay the applicant the sum of $253.75 within 28 days; 2No order as to costs. Catchwords: AGRICULTURAL TENANCY - no written agreement - no condition report - no rent ledger Legislation Cited: Agricultural Tenancies Act 1990 (NSW) ss 5, 12, 13 and 21 Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) ss 28, 36, 38 Civil and Administrative Tribunal Rules 2014 (NSW) rr 31, 32 Category: Principal judgment Parties: The applicant appeared in person Representation: Mr Brigden for the respondent File Number(s): COM 14/04018 Publication restriction: Nil

reasons for decision

Application 1This is an application by the landowner against the tenant under the Agricultural Tenancies Act 1990 (NSW) (ATA) for arrears of rent (agistment); water usage, slashing; and repairs to gates, fences and yards.

Appearances 2Both parties appeared and the application was opposed. The respondent appeared by Mr Brigden Solicitor who was given leave to appear.

Legal representation for respondent 3At the hearing, the respondent applied for legal representation by Mr Brigden, Solicitor pursuant to the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Rules 2014 (NSW) ("CATR") r 31 (Application for leave to represent a party). That application was opposed by the applicant on the grounds that she were not represented, parties were not entitled to representation in this hearing, she was at a disadvantage as a lay person without knowledge of legal proceedings; and the solicitor would be able to unfairly influence the Tribunal. 4An examination of the file showed that Mr Brigden had been involved in the respondent's defence and had knowledge of the matter. 5The guiding principle to be applied was whether Mr Brigden was likely to be of assistance to the Tribunal in achieving a 'just, quick and cheap' outcome: Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) ("CATA") s 36 (Guiding principle to be applied to practice and procedure). 6The question of whether leave might be granted for a party to be legally represented in this Tribunal is to be determined by applying the CATA s 38(4), CATA s 45 (Representation of parties); CATR rr 31 (Application for leave to represent a party) and 32 (Granting and revocation of leave for a person to represent party). 7I considered CATR 32 and found that Mr Brigden: (a)had sufficient knowledge of the issues in dispute to enable him to represent the respondent effectively before the Tribunal; (b)had (as a solicitor admitted to practice in the NSW Supreme Court and subject to the ethical obligations of his profession) the ability to deal fairly and honestly with the Tribunal and the applicants; (c)had sufficient authority to bind the respondent; (d)the applicants would not be prejudiced and his appearance would not be unfair to them; and (e)he was likely to assist the Tribunal by bringing focus to the real issues in dispute. 8In the circumstances and pursuant to CATR 32 conditional leave was granted to Mr Brigden to appear at the hearing for the respondent, the condition being that if he ceased to be of assistance to the Tribunal his right of appearance for the respondent would be revoked. The Tribunal had no cause to later revoke Mr Brigden's appearance.