NSW Caselaw
Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: 203 Castlereagh Street Pty Ltd v Skybloo Holdings Pty Ltd (No 2) [2015] NSWCATAP 170 Hearing dates: 15 and 16 December 2014 Date of orders: 12 August 2015 Decision date: 12 August 2015 Jurisdiction: Appeal Panel Before: M Chesterman, Principal Member J Lucy, Senior Member Decision: 1. The decision of the Consumer and Commercial Division made on 22 July 2014 is affirmed. 2. Any application for costs by the First or the Second Respondent must be filed and served, with supporting submissions, within 21 days of this decision. Within a further 21 days, the Appellant is to file and serve its submissions (if any) in response. If any party considers that a hearing on the matter of costs is required, it must address this topic in its submissions. This matter will then be determined by the Appeal Panel, with or without a hearing. Catchwords: Retail lease – dates of commencement and termination – whether section 8 of Retail Leases Act 1994 applicable – whether option to renew exercised – procedural fairness Legislation Cited: Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013; Retail Leases Act 1994 Cases Cited: 203 Castlereagh Street Pty Ltd v Skybloo Holdings Pty Ltd [2014] NSWCATAP 49 Aspromonte Pty Ltd v Zagari [1999] NSWSC 831 Re Bevillesta Pty Ltd [2013] NSWSC 1258 Callaghan v Merivale Cbd Pty Limited [2005] NSWSC 985 Downey v Prior (1960) 103 CLR 353 Jones v Dunkel [1959] HCA 8; (101) CLR 298 Prudential Assurance Co Ltd v Health Minders Pty Ltd (1987) 9 NSWLR 673 Randi Wixs Pty Ltd v Pokana Pty Ltd (No 2) [2003] NSWADT 4 Spuds Surf Chatswood Pty Ltd v PT Ltd (RLD) (No 2) [2012] NSWADTAP 2 Tim Barr Pty Ltd v Narui Gold Coast Pty Ltd [2010] NSWSC 29 Trustees Executors and Agency Co Ltd v Peters (1960) 102 CLR 537 Whiteway House No. 199 Pty Ltd v Abracoona Pty Ltd, Unreported, Supreme Court of NSW, Hodgson J, 29 May 1998 Category: Principal judgment Parties: 203 Castlereagh Street Pty Ltd (Appellant) Skybloo Holdings Pty Ltd (First Respondent); Waeil Rustom (Second Respondent) Representation: Counsel: F Salama (First Respondent) D Williams (Second 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