Published in Property Law & Conveyancing on 13th May 2025

A recent decision by the Supreme Court of Queensland, Evans v Jan [2025] QSC 31, provides a crucial lesson for purchasers in property transactions. The result in this case is an important reminder to never rely on a selling agent’s representations without verifying them with your legal representatives first. If there’s a discrepancy between what the agent says and the contract terms, get it confirmed in writing. Failing to do so can risk termination of the contract and forfeiture of your deposit. The Case Overview The purchaser entered into a standard residential property sale contract to buy a property for $985,000 from the vendor. The contract required a 10% deposit of $98,5...

Read more …

Published in Property Law & Conveyancing on 30th Apr 2025

Initially, the tax applied only to inner and middle Melbourne suburbs. As of 1 January 2025, significant changes have come into effect, expanding the tax's reach beyond inner and middle Melbourne to cover all residential land across Victoria (except for land in an alpine resort). This means that many more property owners may now be subject to the tax, including those who may not have previously needed to consider it. Which Properties Are Affected? Any residential property in Victoria (except for those in an alpine resort) may be subject to VRLT if the property remains vacant for more than six months in the previous calendar year. These six months do not need to be consecutive — the t...

Read more …

Published in Property Law & Conveyancing on 11th Apr 2016

A landlord attempted to evict a couple who had put their St Kilda rental property on Airbnb without her permission. The landlord argued that by letting the property on Airbnb, the couple had effectively created a sublease. As with most residential leases, the lease in question provided that the couple could not sublease without her permission.  As permission had not been granted, she argued they were in breach of the lease.  The tribunal dismissed the landlord’s claim finding that an Airbnb listing did not amount to a sub-lease.  The member made such a finding on the basis that Airbnb guests do not have exclusive possession of a premises and based also on the wording of Ai...

Read more …

Published in Property Law & Conveyancing on 4th Apr 2016

It is easy to understand the lure of Airbnb for property owners and tenants alike. Home owners can potentially earn two to three times the revenue that a standard annual tenancy could generate whereas tenants, subletting, can earn as much as $200 a night whilst on holiday or shacking up with a friend.  These opportunities for earning windfall revenue have seen the growth in professional hosts – those who have listed multiple dwellings on Airbnb. The increase in 'professional hosts’ has in turn spawned the rise of the Airbnb start up.  Amongst many, these include Tel Aviv start up, Guesty, a by-product of the industry. Guesty provides services such as housekeeping, keydrop&n...

Read more …

Published in Property Law & Conveyancing on 22nd Oct 2015

There is long standing discussion surrounding which outgoings are permissible for landlords to pass onto tenants. Generally, whether outgoings can be passed onto the tenant will depend on what has been agreed between the parties in their retail lease agreement.  Where it has been agreed that certain outgoings must be paid or reimbursed by the tenant, the landlord must be careful to comply with the obligations imposed by the Retail Leases Act (and associated regulations) in relation to recovering such costs.  For example, the landlord cannot pass on outgoings unless it has specified as to the type of outgoings and given an estimate annually to the tenant (section 39 of the Retai...

Read more …

Published in Property Law & Conveyancing on 15th Aug 2014

Rudstein Kron Lawyers successfully represented a property developer in two separate proceedings in the Victorian Supreme Court arising out of the same transaction with the same purchaser. The Court’s decision should alert purchasers to do everything reasonably required to secure finance where a Contract contains “subject to finance” provisions.  Facts The case concerned a Contract of Sale for an “off the plan” purchase of a residential home in Caulfield South. The Purchasers paid a deposit of $59,500 upon signing the Contract. The Contract was “subject to finance” and general condition 14 of the Contract provided as follows: 14. LOAN 14.1. … this contract is subje...

Read more …