Retail Lease Act 2003
-
Tenants with less than 20 employees will soon have a new weapon in disputes with landlords as a result of amendments to the Australian Consumer Law: they will be able to challenge a term in a lease that is “unfair”. The legislation effecting the changes, the Treasury Legislation Amendment (Small Business and Unfair Contract Terms)
-
The weakness of a party’s case in a retail tenancy dispute can be taken into account in determining whether or not it has “conducted” a “proceeding in a vexatious way” that would entitle the other party to a cost order under s.92(2) of the Retail Leases Act 2003 (Vic). Part 10 of the Act contains
-
Today I commented on an advisory opinion given by the President of VCAT, Justice Garde, in which His Honour decided that: (a) a landlord could not recover from a tenant the costs of complying with essential safety measure requirements imposed on the landlord under the Building Act 1993 and its regulations; (b) a landlord
-
Landlords cannot require tenants under retail premises leases to undertake and pay for the work that a landlord must perform to comply with the essential safety measure requirements contained in the Building Act 1993 (BA) and its regulations. Nor can a landlord require a tenant to pay as an outgoing the costs that the landlord
-
The question of whether the “profits method” of determining rentals for hotel premises contravenes s.37(2) of the Retail Leases Act 2003 (Vic) has finally been determined by the Supreme Court of Victoria. Under the “profits method” the valuer estimates the income and expenses of the business with the difference between the two estimates being the
