What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4562430 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenant is ordered to pay costs of $7,389.03 to the landlord immediately.

How much money was awarded in case 4562430?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4562430?

The primary dispute was Unit Titles.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4562430?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9837772-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4562430 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenant is ordered to pay costs of $7,389.03 to the landlord immediately.

How much money was awarded in case 4562430?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4562430?

The primary dispute was Unit Titles.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4562430?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9837772-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4562430 — Unit Titles

Tenantcheck Insights

Reasons

An order was made by the Tribunal in favour of the landlord following a hearing on 20 December 2023.

The parties were invited to file submissions with regards to costs following the order. The landlord has filed a memorandum within the time limits ordered. The tenant has not. The Tribunal indicated that the issue of costs would then be considered without the need for a further appearance by the parties.

Section 102 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) sets out the circumstances where the Tribunal can award costs. Sections 102(2) and (3) RTA provide that that where any of the parties is represented by counsel, the Tribunal may order a party to pay the reasonable costs of another party. The landlord was represented by counsel.

In Body Corporate No 209774 v Wu [2018] NZDC 19792, the District Court held that this provision does not entitle a successful non-represented party to claim costs against a legally represented party, even where they have incurred legal costs prior to the hearing.

In French v Ryan (DC Auckland, CIV-2012-004-000711, 29 November 2012) the District Court held the Tribunal can consider the costs that would have been awarded under the appropriate category in the District Court Rules 2009). In Holden v Architectural Finishes Ltd [1997] 3 NZLR 143, the High Court held that ‘reasonable costs’ means a reasonable contribution and not a mere gesture. It considered that a contribution in the range of 40% to 70% would likely satisfy this requirement.

In BC 346799 V Ikeda (2020) NZDC the District Court confirmed that a claim for 66% of actual costs was reasonable.

In David Blair Ltd v Hawkins Arms & Engineering Ltd (1988) PRNZ 162 the High Court outlined several relevant factors in assessing costs: a. the length of the hearing, b. the amount of money involved, c. the importance of the issues d. the legal and factual complexities, e. the amount of time required for effective preparation, f. the likely or actual costs incurred.

Other factors that may be relevant include: the conduct of the parties, the degree of success, whether unnecessary steps or technical points were taken, and whether arguments lacked substance.

This matter was part heard over two separate hearing days.

The amount ordered at $27,941.31 less the bond, is not inconsiderable.

The amount involved indicates that there was importance to the landlord.

The legal and factual issues were not complex.

The amount of time involved in preparing effectively is reflected in the actual costs claimed.

In light of those factors and the direction as to costs from the District Court cases referred to previously, I order the tenant to pay costs of $7,389.03 to the landlord, being 66% of the actual costs applied for.

Reasons

An order was made by the Tribunal in favour of the landlord following a hearing on 20 December 2023.

In BC 346799 V Ikeda (2020) NZDC the District Court confirmed that a claim for 66% of actual costs was reasonable.

Other factors that may be relevant include: the conduct of the parties, the degree of success, whether unnecessary steps or technical points were taken, and whether arguments lacked substance.

This matter was part heard over two separate hearing days.

The amount ordered at $27,941.31 less the bond, is not inconsiderable.

The amount involved indicates that there was importance to the landlord.

The legal and factual issues were not complex.

The amount of time involved in preparing effectively is reflected in the actual costs claimed.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4562430 — Unit Titles

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4562430 — Unit Titles

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions