Rogers v Vinoly [2016] NSWCATAP 2

Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Rogers v Vinoly [2016] NSWCATAP 2 Hearing dates: 16 November 2015 Date of orders: 04 January 2016 Decision date: 04 January 2016 Jurisdiction: Appeal Panel Before: R Seiden SC, Principal Member S Thode, Senior Member Decision: The Appeal is dismissed. Catchwords: ADMINISTRATIVE – Civil and Administrative Tribunal (NSW) – appeal – question of law – requirement in s 10 of the Residential Tenancies Act that tenancy be in writing Legislation Cited: Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) Residential Tenancies Act 2010 Cases Cited: Hope v Bathurst City Council (1980) 144 CLR 1 at 7; Collector of Customs v Agfa-Gevaert (1996) 186 CLR 389; Collector of Customs v Pozzolanic Enterprises Pty Ltd (1993) 43 FCR 280; Sharp Corporation of Australia Pty Ltd v Collector of Customs (1995) 59 FCR 6 Category: Principal judgment Parties: J Rogers (Appellant) in person K Vinoly (Respondent) by telephone C Stokes (Respondent) no appearance Representation: File Number(s): AP 15/48450 Decision under appeal Court or tribunal: Civil and Administrative Tribunal (NSW) Jurisdiction: Consumer and Commercial Division Date of Decision: 12 August 2015 Before: C Campbell File Number(s): RT 15/45124

REASONS FOR DECISION

Background 1. The respondents are the named tenants, under a written residential tenancy agreement, of residential premises at Manly, NSW. On 23 May 2015, the appellant moved into those premises and shortly thereafter paid a 2 week bond and commenced to pay rent to the respondents. In July 2015, the respondents purported to serve a notice of termination on the appellant, although the respondents maintained that the appellant was a border or lodger and not a tenant.