International Society of Primerus Law Firms

Sydney Attorney
Matthew Rafferty

Phone: +61 2 9291 7100


Languages: English

Matthew acts for major retail and commercial property management corporations, advising on all aspects of retail and commercial leasing transactions, shopping centre redevelopment, land title office issues, retail legislation and corporations’ law.

Matthew is part of the Carroll & O’Dea Lawyers leasing team, which provides a comprehensive leasing transaction service across the eastern states of Australia. This service includes providing initial advice during the commercial negotiation for the new lease, drafting, negotiating, completing formal documentation, and, if necessary, dispute resolution.

As well as leasing, Matthew is able to advise on all kinds of land dealings, property related claims and disputes.

Matthew also assists the Carroll & O’Dea Lawyers not-for-profit team with advice in relation to property development and transactions. This includes leases and property development matters for schools, university offices and welfare services.

Matthew is based in Carroll & O’Dea’s Sydney office, located on the lands of the Gadigal people of the Eora Nation. Matthew acknowledges the Traditional Owners of the land on which we work and pays respects to the Elders past and present.

Areas of Practice:

  • Conveyancing and property Law


  • Land Rights and Native Title – For lawyers
    Published 07 Jul 2013
    A column in Tracker magazine written by Chris Munro commented that a German back-packer would know the difference between land rights and native title, “whereas most Australian Lawyers wouldn’t have a clue what you were talking about.” This article set out some of the basic concepts… for the lawyers.
  • Failure to check envelope
    Published 15 Jun 2013
    In this case, a solicitor exercised a put-option for a Vendor client by placing a signed contract for sale of land and cover letter exercising the option in an envelope and posting it to the solicitor for the Purchaser.
  • The Golden Sultana Problem – Holding over and the Retail Leases Acts in NSW and Victoria
    Published 17 May 2013
    We have heard of some concern from landlords regarding a 2006 Victorian VCAT decision, Daco Enterprises Pty Ltd v The Golden Sultana Pty Ltd (Retail Tenancies). The Tribunal had found that in the particular circumstances of that case, sections 11 and 12 of the Retail Leases Act 2003 (Vic) provide that if a tenant held-over for more than a year, the hold-over was a new lease subject to the Victorian Retail Leases Act. That new lease may be extended by the operation of section 21 to a five year lease commencing when the holding over began – the “Golden Sultana Problem”.
  • Landlord must comply with the Fitout Guide!
    Published 08 May 2013
    Part of the latest decision in a long running case between a landlord and tenant is based upon the NSW ADT’s finding that the lessee may reasonably expect the lessor to comply with it’s own fitout guide.
  • Lease Insurance
    Published 12 Apr 2013
    Cases involving disputes between lessor’s insurers and lessee’s insurers are determined by the particular terms of the lease and insurance policies. Courts have not laid down many general principles. In the case, Standard House Publishing v Chen; Gio General v Allianz Australia Insurance the insurers of the lessor and lessee dispute between each other which one of them is liable for the costs of loss caused by the lessor.
  • Difficult Disclosure
    Published 02 Apr 2013
    In a new NSW ADT case, a lessee has been permitted to rescind a lease because the lessor failed to provide a disclosure statement in circumstances where it was almost impossible for the lessor to provide one in accordance with the Retail Leases Act (NSW) 1994. The case has a clear lesson… always issue a new disclosure statement when an entity to the lease (or assignment) transaction changes.
  • Toga on Appeal
    Published 27 Mar 2013
    The Appeal case Toga Pty Ltd v Perpetual Nominees Ltd (RLD) [2013] NSW ADTAP2, delivered 15 January 2013, affirmed the outcome tribunal’s decision at first instance , however, for substantially different reasons. On appeal, the tribunal was able to find a difference between the meanings of “Commencement Date” and “Commencement Date of the Renewed Term”.
  • Be careful with lease guarantees
    Published 20 Mar 2013
    In a NSW Supreme Court case, a landlord lost the right to claim over $1.3 million from the guarantors of a lease because of incomplete and inadequate documentation. The court found that all five guarantees were completely ineffectual, and the landlord could not claim against any of them This case reads like a magic trick –the fifth guarantee seems valid right up to the end, but it disappears with the others. Landlords must be careful that all guarantees are correctly documented, because if one is not executed, the other guarantees may be ineffectual as a result.
  • Paddy’s Markets Case Ends
    Published 08 Mar 2013
    Back in 2009, a retailer at Paddy’s Markets objected to changes in trading hours on the basis that they were made contrary to the provisions of the Retail Leases Act, and commenced proceedings in the ADT.
  • Buying a House?
    Published 28 Feb 2013
    This Checklist may come in handy!
  • The Fidelity of the Bargain
    Published 25 Feb 2013
    In this case, the parties disputed whether a year long rent free period should apply at the beginning of the option lease, as well as the initial lease.
  • Property Newsletter – October 2012
    Published 08 Oct 2012
    October’s Property Newsletter features topics such as False and Misleading Statements by Agents; The Foundry; and Portico Plaza.
  • The NEW Personal Property Securities Act – What it means for Landlords
    Published 12 Sep 2011
  • The NEW Personal Property Securities Act – What it means for Landlords
    Published 12 Sep 2011
    In brief – Landlords are not directly affected. This Act primarily affects finance providers and people who lease goods. A landlord will be affected if they provide finance or lease goods (eg vehicles or equipment) or possibly if they finance a lessee’s fitout of premises and wish to retains ownership of the fitout. The main objective of the Act is to remove the illusion of wealth.
  • Damages, duty to mitigate and the new duty to negotiate
    Published 08 Jun 2011
    Beware the new Duty to Negotiate provisions in the Civil Procedure Act
  • Property Law Update Retail Leasing November 2009
    Published 01 Nov 2009
    Assignment of retail lease – if it wobbles like a duck and quacks like a duck. A landlord refused to consent to assign on the basis that the Assignee would be changing the use to which the shop was put. The Tribunal agreed and the refusal was upheld.
  • Property Law Update – Retail Leasing – October 2009
    Published 01 Oct 2009
    OH&S and fitout works in leased premises – principal contractors. A quick and brief overview of some of the OH&S issues associated with fitout works in leased premises – an important area of consideration for Lessors and Lessees.
  • Property Law Update September 2009
    Published 01 Sep 2009
    Misleading and deceptive conduct and unconscionable conduct. When does an agent or manager go too far in attempting to secure a commercial outcome for a landlord? This newsletter looks at a recent case where the manager’s conduct was misleading and deceptive and unconscionable and the landlord and manager were penalised as a result.
  • Property Law Update August 2009
    Published 01 Aug 2009
    What is compensation for fitout? The New South Wales Supreme Court had to determine what is ‘compensation for the fitout’ which a Lessor is required to pay a Lessee when the Lessor terminates a lease under a demolition clause – we look at lessons from that decision.
  • Property Law Update July 2009
    Published 01 Jul 2009
    Licences can be a retail shop subject leases too. A recent decision in the NSW ADT reinforces earlier Court decisions that a licence granted for use of space by a retail shop business will itself be a retail shop lease and will be subject to the provisions of the Retail Leases Act 1994 (NSW) – including the minimum five year term.
  • Property Law Update June 2009
    Published 01 Jun 2009
    Invalid Relocation Notice A short note on a case from the Victoria Tribunal which found that a Relocation Notice served under the Victorian Retail Leases Act was invalid as it did not contain sufficient details for the alternate premises and because the alternate premises were commercially disadvantageous for the tenant.
  • Property Law Update May 2009
    Published 01 May 2009
    Key points in Relocation and Demolition under the NSW Retail Leases Act. This newsletter investigates court interpretations of key terms within the NSW Retail Leases Act including ‘vacant possession’, ‘genuine proposal’ and ‘alternative premises’. These are all crucial components of the legislation in relation to a landlord terminating a retail lease using a demolition or relocation clause. 

Key Professional Achievements:

  • Matthew obtained his law degree from the University of NSW and also has tertiary qualifications in science and philosophy.
  • Matthew was admitted in 2007 and joined Carroll & O’Dea Lawyers in the same year.
  • Matthew was made an Associate in November 2009 and a Partner in 2015.

Contact This Firm

Carroll & O'Dea Lawyers

Level 18, St James Centre
111 Elizabeth Street
Sydney, New South Wales, 2000

Law Firm Contact: Selwyn Black

Tel: +61 2 9291 7100

Fax: +61 2 9221 1117



Member Since: 2014

Send Us An Email

Preferred Contact Method?

 Email Phone - AM Phone - PM

Disclaimer: Primerus and our member law firms welcome your emails, contact forms, phone calls and written letters. Contacting us does not create an attorney-client relationship. Please do not send any confidential information to Primerus or its member law firms until an attorney-client relationship has been established. Thank you and we look forward to serving you.

* Denotes Required Field