NSW Caselaw
Supreme Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Ko v CKAS Enterprises Pty Ltd [2018] NSWSC 1876 Hearing dates: 20, 21 November 2018 Date of orders: 12 December 2018 Decision date: 12 December 2018 Jurisdiction: Equity Before: Emmett AJA Decision: See paras [71]-[73] Catchwords: REAL PROPERTY - lease - whether notice of exercise under s 129 of the Conveyancing Act 1919 (NSW) is invalid - where lease agreement included an option to renew that had to be exercised in writing within a specified time period - whether the requirement for writing was waived - whether the option to renew was exercised - whether the landlord is estopped from denying that the option was validly exercised - convention estoppel - whether the landlord and tenant acted on the common assumption that the option to renew had been exercised Legislation Cited: Conveyancing Act 1919 (NSW) Real Property Act 1900 (NSW) Retail Leases Act 1994 (NSW) Cases Cited: Heggies Bulkhaul Ltd v Global Minerals Australia Pty Ltd [2003] NSWSC 851 Lindsay William Gillard v Lifoon Pty Ltd [2005] NSWSC 687 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Kristen Yoon Sun Ko (Plaintiff/Cross Defendant) CKAS Enterprises Pty Ltd (Defendant/Cross Claimant) Representation: Counsel:
S J Phillips (Plaintiff/Cross Defendant) D P O'Connor (Defendant/Cross Claimant)
Solicitors: PSK Legal (Plaintiff/Cross Defendant) HIS Lawyers (Defendant/Cross Claimant) File Number(s): 2016/240977
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