More detail needed in Notices to Vacate

Posted on 20 Sep 2018

A recent Supreme Court of Victoria decision suggests landlords may need to include more detail in their Notice to Vacate applications. 
The decision, Jafarpourasr v. Tancevski, sets a new practice for how Notices to Vacate must be completed. It may change the way VCAT decides some possession applications in the Residential Tenancies List.

Until now, it may have been adequate for landlords to quote directly from the Residential Tenancies Act when completing some forms of Notices to Vacate, rather than give specific details – for example, saying the landlord needed possession to allow a family member to move in as the reason for a 60-day notice. 
However, the Supreme Court decision ruled that the landlord must provide more specific details in the Notice to Vacate, for example, providing the name of the family member moving in and the landlord’s relationship to them.
Landlords will need to more carefully and specifically word their Notices to Vacate, as VCAT will now be applying the new interpretation of the law. Notices to Vacate which have previously been accepted by the Tribunal may now be found to be invalid. Tenants may have grounds to challenge a Notice to Vacate that does not contain enough detail. 
VCAT is not able to provide legal advice. If you have a question about whether a Notice to Vacate is correctly completed, there are organisations that may be able to help you. Visit Renting a Home on our website for details.