A disability pensioner will soon know if he is made homeless by Housing Tasmania, pending a court decision.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Hobart Magistrates Court in October granted an order for his Glenorchy home to be vacated after a notice to vacate, served in June, was disputed.
An appeal was heard against that decision in Hobart Supreme Court on Tuesday, with top human rights lawyer Ron Merkel representing the 53-year-old intellectually disabled man.
Mr Merkel said Housing Tasmania had extended Gregory Parsons’ lease on his home 13 times, for three and 12-month periods, over 10 years.
The lawyer said he was given a notice to vacate on the basis that his lease would not be extended in June.
Mr Merkel said this decision came with no reasoning, no opportunity to have the matter reviewed, and would have rendered Mr Parsons homeless and placed at the bottom of the housing waiting list.
He argued the court had erred in its previous decision as it could not be satisfied the eviction on the grounds the lease expiration was “genuine or just” as required by law.
Mr Merkel said the decision to end the lease conflicted with the government’s policies on homelessness, tenants’ rights, and transparency, as well as the statutory obligations of Housing Tasmania’s director.
He said the magistrate, by law, was required to examine the reasons behind the lease termination.
State government lawyer Paul Turner said as determined in the initial case, Housing Tasmania had the right to terminate a lease with 60 days of notice.
He said the department was in the same position as a private landlord under the legislation and did not need to provide an explanation for terminating a lease.
Mr Turner said if the appeal was upheld, the state would argue for the matter to be remitted to the Magistrates Court so Housing Tasmania could provide evidence to support the eviction.
The right to do so in the initial case was waived.
Mr Turner said this meant the merits of Mr Parson’s evidence weren’t tested.
But Mr Merkel argued against that, saying the opportunity was provided the first time around.
Justice Greg Geason reserved the matter for decision at a later date.