Wednesday 23/07/25 – Property Management Update: VCAT & Property Related Court Cases for June 2025

As an ongoing service to clients, we continue to provide you with details of VCAT retail leasing cases and selected property-related cases each month.

Here are five cases that may be of interest to you, as summarised below:

VCAT Case

Nwankwo v Malik Suleman Pty Ltd (Building and Property) [2025] VCAT 495 (4 June 2025) This case dealt with the lease of an office which was subsequently found to be a retail lease. The tenant claimed that the outgoings charged were not in accordance with Section 39 of the RLA. The tenant was partially successful in their claim; however, past payments made for outgoings were not refundable to the tenant.

Click Here for Further Details.

The Monaco Au Pty Ltd v Bondella Pty Ltd (No 3) (Building and Property) [2025] VCAT 638 (27 June 2025) This case dealt with a landlord pursuing a claim for arrears, reinstatement costs, and ongoing losses. The arrears and reinstatement costs were proven; however, the claim for ongoing loss to the end of the lease was only partially successful.

Click Here for Further Details.

Roche v Owners Corporation 1 PS747688Q (Building and Property) [2025] VCAT 518 (11 June 2025)This case dealt with unit owners seeking to join the original building contractor’s insurer in a claim for the unreasonable flow of water onto their property. The claim was not successful.

Click Here for Further Details.

 

County Court Case

Liden v Musumeci & Anor [2025] VCC 809 (24 June 2025) This case dealt with the rectification of building works involving drainage and guttering undertaken by a neighbour. The plaintiff was partially successful in their claim.

Click Here for Further Details.

 

Supreme Court Case

Formquip Nirvana Pty Ltd v Memphis Property Co Pty Ltd & Anor [2025] VSC 348 (16 June 2025) This case dealt with a development of 31 apartments on Manningham Road, Bulleen. The first defendant, who had loaned money for the project, had lodged a caveat on the title. The plaintiff sought to remove it but was unsuccessful.

Click Here for Further Details.