Login
NSW property owner loses eviction fight over rental ‘error’
A NSW owner has lost her fight to evict a tenant after she was found to not be the landlord, following a rental administration “error”.
A NSW tribunal has dismissed a property owner’s appeal to evict a tenant from her North Steyne dwelling, as her husband was named as the landlord on the rental agreement instead.
Last month, the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal (NCAT) found that the owner, Sofie Becaus, did not have the authority to evict the tenant based on ownership alone.
In 2025, Becaus acted to regain possession of the property, which she wanted to return to short-term holiday rental use.
The tenant had entered into a rental agreement in July 2023, although the document had identified Becaus’ husband, Phillip Sullivan, as the landlord.
According to the tribunal, Becaus was often overseas, and Sullivan assisted in running the premises, including liaising with the property manager.
On 10 September 2025, Becaus issued a notice of termination to the tenant, requiring her to vacate the premises by 12 December that year.
After the tenant failed to leave, in January 2026, Becaus lodged her original application to NCAT, stating that the renter had “ignored our 90-day notice”.
The tenant, however, challenged the validity of the termination, arguing that the notice had been issued by someone other than Sullivan, the landlord identified in the agreement.
At the original hearing in June, Becaus argued that Sullivan had been erroneously named as the landlord, but it is not clear as to how the mistake came about.
The tribunal dismissed the case, finding Becaus had not established she was the landlord, and it did not have jurisdiction to hear her application for termination and possession.
Although Becaus owned the property, it said ownership alone did not make her the landlord under the Residential Tenancies Act 2010 (NSW).
Becaus appealed the decision, arguing that the tribunal should have considered who had granted the tenant the right to occupy the property, rather than relying on whose name was on the residential agreement.
Free investor loan check
Better property decisions start with smarter lending.
A free 15-minute finance check for property investors.
What are your lending goals?
Choose a goal to request a callback.
Ready to talk?
Book a 15-minute call →Finni Pty Ltd · Australian Credit Licence 384324 · Privacy
She again maintained that her husband had been named as the landlord “in error”, and claimed he had only been acting on her behalf as the owner.
Further, she said that her property manager had also been acting on her authority, supporting her claim that she was the true landlord.
The tribunal backed the original decision and dismissed the appeal, finding that Becaus was not the legal landlord and had no standing to apply to terminate the tenancy.
“The Tribunal’s primary basis for dismissing the proceedings was its conclusion that the Appellant was not the landlord … and therefore lacked standing to bring the application. We have upheld that conclusion,” it said.
Want to see more stories from trusted news sources?
Make Smart Property Investment a preferred news source on Google.
Click here to add Smart Property Investment as a preferred news source.