Christensen T/A Blunder Road News v Hambi Pty Ltd and Spiro Holdings Pty Ltd [2006] RSLT 17

1 [2006] RSLT 17 THE RETAIL SHOP LEASES ACT In the matter of Dispute No 2006/0013 JEAN PHILOMENA MARY CHRISTENSEN (T/A BLUNDER ROAD NEWS) - Claimant - and - HAMBI PTY LIMITED and SPIRO HOLDINGS PTY LIMITED - Respondents Coram: B Cotterell (CHAIRMAN) N Judge R Hourigan DECISION Given on Friday, 16 June, 2006. -- 1 of 2 -- 2 In this application, Jean Christensen is claiming compensation from Hambi Pty Ltd & Spiro Holdings Pty Ltd on the basis of alleged false and misleading statements or misrepresentations, which she alleges are a breach of S.43.(2) of the Retail Shop Leases Act. Ms Christensen has filed material in the tribunal but has not complied with the tribunal’s directions that the material delivered shall: contain statements of all witnesses on whom the claimant relies, and; set out the exact terms of the order which the tribunal is asked to make. In fact, there is no statement filed by Ms Christensen or anyone else on her behalf in the material filed. It might have been expected that each statement would have attached to it any relevant documents with an explanation in the statement as to how they are relevant. Instead Ms Christensen has filed some assorted documents with no explanation as to their relevance to her claims. The result is that there is no evidence as to what statements she claims were false or misleading or misrepresentations and, consequently, no evidence as to how these could have misled her and no evidence as to her reliance upon them. It is not even alleged by Ms Christensen that there was a lease and, in this regard, the tribunal notes the respondents’ material contains a copy of a lease and an agreement for a lease, both of which are unsigned. A letter from Luke Comino, solicitor, to Godfrey Walker, solicitor, dated 26 October, 2005 and filed by Ms Christensen states that the lease was never signed. This was confirmed by Mr Comino this morning. While the tribunal is not required to dredge through the material filed in order to make a case for the claimant, from a careful reading of the material filed it is clear that any lease proposed to be relied upon in this application was between the respondents and Fernbale Pty Ltd, of which Ms Christensen is simply a director. This was not explained by her in her material, but determined by a company search. While the tribunal in appropriate circumstances could give leave to substitute Fernbale Pty Ltd for the claimant, Ms Christensen, that will not overcome the problem that the claimant has failed to produce any evidence to prove the claims. Even when the tribunal looks at the documents filed by the claimant in quantification of her claim, the profit and loss statements refer to Fernbale and Meota Pty Ltd and not Fernbale Pty Ltd. For all of these reasons, the application simply must be dismissed. B Cotterell, Chairman. -- 2 of 2 --