Sam哥聊租赁：商业租约租客不付租的案例分析

vking

实在没有时间，这个文章本来是发给内部商业租约客户的，所以用了英文。我记得原来这里翻译的大神很多，愿意奉献的可以帮忙翻译一下。但请务转载再其他未经我同意的地方。谢谢。

Background:

Followed by the decisions of the National Cabinet to support the tenants and landlords through the coronavirus pandemic by reforming the residential and commercial tenancy laws, Victoria has passed the Commercial Tenancy Relief Scheme(CTRS). (please check my previous article about how the code apply to the rent relief calculation) and this Scheme further extended to 28 March 2021.



PS Market Pty Ltd v Brijcam Nominees Pty Ltd (Building and Property) [2020] VCAT 1468 (24 December 2020) A recent ruling from VCAT has provided excellent insight into how VCAT interpreting the code and regulation.

In this case, the landlord served the breach notice to the tenant and followed by re-entering the property to forfeit the lease. The tenant then, brought this application to VCAT seeking to stop the landlord to re-enter the property since CTRS in place and reinstate the lease.

Result: VCAT does not consider the lease is under protection if it is not an “eligible lease”, which does not think the tenant under the protection of the Act.



My observation:

To determine if the lease is an “eligible lease” VCAT applies strictly form in section 13 of the Act (as amended by s 4 of the Amending Act). It does not consider if the group of companies which other company/parent company/umbrella company are eligible to the job keep, it has to be the tenant company itself.






Reference:

PS Market Pty Ltd v Brijcam Nominees Pty Ltd (Building and Property) [2020] VCAT 1468 (24 December 2020)

http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bi ... VCAT/2020/1468.html

Meaning of the eligible lease

http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bi ... oma2020334/s13.html