Australia, July 24 -- New South Wales Land and Environment Court issued text of the following judgement on June 24:

1. LEEMING JA: Mr Hakija Sinanovic appeals from a judgment of the Local Court in favour of his former landlord, Ms Ludan Bone, in the amount of $65,246.85. That amount represents substantial success on her claim under a residential tenancy agreement in 2018 in respect of unpaid rent, liability to pay an occupation fee, and damages for cleaning and repairs to the property. The judgment is the result of a rehearing, following Mr Sinanovic's earlier success in an appeal to this Court setting aside an earlier judgment of the Local Court, on the basis of a denial of procedural fairness. That background may explain the attention directed in Mr Sinanovic's written submissions to issues of bias and procedural fairness. That background is also relevant to a threshold issue of representation, bearing in mind that this relatively small claim remains unresolved after more than four years, the landlord's costs are said (not implausibly) to exceed the amount of her claim, and that throughout that period Mr Sinanovic, who is illiterate in English and unwell, has been represented by his former wife Ms Maria Sinanaj.

2. Mr Sinanovic has a right of appeal from the Local Court to the Supreme Court but only insofar as he is dissatisfied with a judgment "only on a question of law": Local Court Act 2007 (NSW), s 39(1). The scope of that appeal may be expanded, by leave, pursuant to s 40. The hearing took place before me, sitting in the Common Law Division and exercising the powers of a Judge of the Court pursuant to s 31(3) of the Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW).

3. Mr Sinanovic's grounds and proposed grounds of appeal are as follows, and reflect the fact that Mr Sinanovic appears not to have had the benefit of legal assistance:

1 Bias: The Magistrate's conduct was of apprehended bias later confirmed in his Decision.

2 Unfair procedure: The Defendant's special needs were not addressed due to his disability having Parkinson's Disease, not been provided with a hearing loop and is illiterate in the English language.

3 Denial of a Fair Hearing: The Magistrate erred by failing to be impartial with his conduct benefitting the Plaintiff's legal representatives at the cost of not allowing procedural fairness to the Defendant.

4 Abuse of Process: The Magistrate erred by not dealing with matters of concern raised by the Defendant.

5 Matters of law and facts: His Honour erred when he failed to consider relevant facts pertaining to evidence by the Defendant before making a finding the disputed lease of 21/3/2018 was valid under s17 of the RTA. Those facts do not support s17. The facts do not support the findings of awarding costs of repairs to the premises. Further relevant facts found were not considered by His Honour.

6 Denied the right to be heard and determined: The Magistrate erred in not allowing the defendant to be heard in open court, open legal argument and determination incurring unnecessary delay and costs. No notice received yet as to the decision on Costs which was set down for decision on 26/7/24.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au/decision/1979ac6bedff6af12fa8c430)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.