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 …

Published in Property Law & Conveyancing on 14th Oct 2013

Facts The case concerned the sale of a large parcel of vacant land in Mount Clear (near Ballarat). The purchaser was a property developer and entered into a contract to purchase the land. During the pre-contractual negotiations, the vendor failed to disclose that a young man committed suicide in a forested area on the land two years before the contract was made. After signing the contract, the vendor received an email from the purchaser advising that it had come to its attention that the deceased’s family had been granted permission by the local council to erect a memorial on the land, and wished to contact the deceased’s family to extend condolences. The purchaser did not complain o...

Read more …

Published in Property Law & Conveyancing on 10th Oct 2013

In Victoria, section 54 of the Retail Leases Act 2003 provides that a landlord is liable to pay a tenant reasonable compensation for loss or damage because the landlord “fails to take reasonable steps to prevent or stop significant disruption within the landlord’s control to the tenant’s trading at the retail premises”. Facts The case concerned a retail premises in a shopping centre that traded as a “pizza bar”. It is important to note that the lease specified the use of the premises as a “Takeaway Café”. The tenant was struggling to pay rent and fell heavily into arrears. The tenant complained to the landlord that it had fallen into arrears because another tenant was t...

Read more …