› failure to provide procedural fairness by rejecting witness party’s evidence as unreliable without cross-examination; whether reference to knowledge of appellant’s nickname in reasons supported an application of a perception of bias.
Appeal
› whether evidence of conversation purporting to vary sub-lease was effective in the context of other variations
› Promissory estoppel
› whether made out.
Costs
› whether discretion was properly exercised
› no error in exercise of the discretion, however may require re-consideration in the light of the appeal. Appeal
