By Angela Kordos

12 March 2021

A head lease is not a lease of a retail premises under the Retail Leases Act 2003.

In the recent case of Izett St Pty Ltd v Applgold Pty Ltd (Building and Property) [2021] VCAT 174 (3 March 2021, Senior Member Forde at VCAT held that a head lease was not a lease of a retail premises under the Retail Leases Act 2003.

The parties entered into a lease back in 1996 for Premises that were dilapidated and uninhabitable. The Tenant spent in excess of $1.2million converting the premises into lettable areas and a residential area. The Tenant subleased and resided on the second floor of the leased premises, and the ground floor was converted into an area suitable for a café or retail food outlet and had been sublet to various entities since 2013. The first floor is configured and fitted out to the specific requirements of the subtenant, with the tenant providing what they refer to as a ‘bespoke rental service’, including provision of a kitchen facility. So effectively the, tenant was in the business of subleasing parts of the leased premises to retail tenants.

It was undisputed that the subtenancies in this case classified as retail leases covered by the Retail Leases Act. However, the key question was whether the Premises themselves (being distinct from the spaces within them leased under the subleases) were used wholly or predominantly for the retail provision of services.

The tenant argued that the subleases entered into between the tenant and its subtenants are retail leases, with the subtenants being the ultimate consumers of the subleased space, and that as a consequence, the premises is used predominantly for the retail provision of services and the head lease must be a retail premises lease.

The Tenant relied on IMCC Group (Australia) Pty Ltd v CB Cold Storage Pty Ltd [2017] VSCA 178 (5 July 2017) (“Cold Storage”) and submitted [at paragraph 22] that:

  1. “the sublease services are provided by the applicant to its subtenants in exchange for payment of a regular fee in the form of rent;
  2. any person can enter into a sublease with the applicant to secure sublease services to occupy part of the Premises;
  3. the applicant’s business of providing a sublease service is available for use by the respective subtenants during normal business hours; and
  4. the subtenants as customers of the applicant do not pass on the subleasing services to anyone else — they are the ultimate consumers of the subleasing services provided by the applicant.”

Both parties relied on the words used by the Court of Appeal in Cold Storage at paragraph 50

“In isolation, none of these features would suffice to constitute the premises as retail premises. Conversely, the absence of one or more of them would not necessarily result in a finding that the premises were not retail premises. However, in the circumstances of this case, when all of those features are taken together, the conclusion must be that the premises are retail premises”

The Landlord contended that the Lease is not a lease of a retail premises, and relied on the fact that the premises must in addition to the ultimate consumer test, be open to the public, namely that there should be no restrictions on access to the service and who can use it. The Landlord relied on the case of Bulk Powders Pty Ltd v Seicon Pty Ltd (Building and Property) [2018] VCAT 2000 and said that the premises are not open to the public because the subtenants had exclusive possession of those parts of the leased premises that they subleased. The landlord’s argument was rejected insofar as it was found by the Tribunal that:

the Premises is ‘open to the public’ in the sense that between sublets it is possible for a member of the public to enter a space available for sublet. There is no evidence to suggest that any person is prohibited from subletting a space in the Premises. …” [para 44]

Senior Member Forde at VCAT nonetheless held that the premises in this fact scenario were not retail premises and the lease was not a retail premises lease:

“50. Had the applicant offered licences to the public to use parts of the Premises it may have been more akin to the provision of services. Unlike a caravan park, serviced office, conference centre or cold storage facility, the applicant gave exclusive possession often for years at a time to its subtenants thereby giving away the right to use the Premises.”  

“51. Subletting premises is not the provision of a service in the sense required by the RLA. If that were the case every sublet premises could be classified as a retail premises. The provision of kitchen facilities by the applicant does not make the Premises retail premises…the applicant is not integral to the operation of the subleases once granted.” 

If you have any questions in relation to this case or the applicability of the Retail Leases Act 2003 to your leasing matter, please do not hesitate to contact Angela Kordos or a member of our property and commercial team.

Related Articles

View All
Property & Development

Option Deeds: What are they and Potential Risks

Contracts of Sale are utilised by the parties to record their agreement to sell and/or buy a property Depending on the...
Read More
Property & Development / Real Estate Agents

Nominating a new purchaser – 3 big things to think about

Some of the questions which you will need to answer when, or even before, you nominate a new purchaser are: How is GST...
Read More
Property & Development / Mortgages, Loans & Finance / Real Estate Agents

What is the Homebuyer Fund?

The Fund allow individuals the opportunity to own their own home that previously has always been out of reach The Fund...
Read More
Litigation & Dispute Resolution / Property & Development

Interstate Landlords in Victoria – new arrangements in the Magistrates’ Court of Victoria

One of the hassles for residential landlords who own property in Victoria but live interstate has been the lack of...
Read More
Property & Development / Real Estate Agents

Recording: TLFC Law Lunchtime Briefing: 2021 Commercial Tenancy Relief Scheme

If you were unable to attend this session, you are welcome to watch the recording at your convenience...
Read More
Property & Development / Commercial Contracts & Agreements / Small to Medium Enterprises

COVID-19 Clauses in Contracts of Sale

The uncertainty and instability of the COVID-19 pandemic continues, as Melbourne endures lockdown 60 and other parts of...
Read More
Property & Development

It’s Groundhog Day: COVID-19 and the new CTRS legislation

It’s a bit like Groundhog Day down here in Victoria: another day, another lockdown Another year, another Commercial...
Read More
Leasing & Lease Disputes / Property & Development / Real Estate Agents

COVID-19 and the new Commercial Tenancy Relief Scheme

A global pandemic, an economy forced into hibernation, and repeated, extended, and somewhat unpredictable lockdowns…...
Read More
Property & Development

TLFC Law Property Team: Finalist in the Lawyers Weekly Australian Law Awards 2021

Tisher Liner FC Law is proud to announce that once again our Property Law Team has been shortlisted as a finalist in...
Read More
Property & Development / Real Estate Agents

TLFC Law Lunchtime Briefing: Post Commercial Tenancy Relief Scheme (CTRS) – what’s next?

If you were unable to attend this session, you are welcome to watch the recording at your convenience Passcode:...
Read More
Property & Development

Further announcements concerning the Victorian budget for 2021-2022. What are they?

The State Government has now released further announcements concerning the Victorian budget for 2021-2022 in...
Read More
Property & Development

2021/2022 Victorian budget, overview on how the changes to taxes will affect the property market

Land Tax Increases to land tax will be raised for properties worth more than $18 million from 1 January 2022 Land tax...
Read More