What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4570455 about?

The tribunal order states: The application for rehearing is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 4570455?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4570455?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4570455?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10145224-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4570455 about?

The tribunal order states: The application for rehearing is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 4570455?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4570455?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4570455?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10145224-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

38A Felton Mathew Avenue, Saint Johns, Auckland 1072 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4570455 — Tenancy dispute

Tenantcheck Insights

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing on 27 th March 2024 via teleconference.

On 8 th December 2023, the Tribunal made an order for the landlord to refund the full amount of rent paid by the tenant due to the premises being an unlawful residential premises.

The landlord applied for a rehearing on the grounds that details of the claim was only submitted 22 hours before the hearing, there were major factual errors in submissions from the applicant and that no notice of being a deemed landlord was ever sent or received.

Section 105(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 provides that the Tribunal has the power to order a rehearing where “a substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice has or may have occurred or is likely to occur”.

Usually the party applying for the rehearing must show that something went wrong with the Tribunal’s procedure, for example, that they did not receive notice of the hearing or they were not able to properly present their case. A rehearing may also be granted where there is new evidence that was not reasonably available at the first hearing, if it could have affected the outcome.

The District Court has held that if the Tribunal was simply wrong in its findings of fact, or its application of the law, this is not sufficient to establish a miscarriage of justice: a rehearing is not an alternative to an appeal. Furthermore, a rehearing will not be granted just because a party is unhappy with the decision, or to give them a second opportunity to present their case.

Has a substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice occurred?

For the following reasons, the landlord has failed to establish the grounds for a rehearing.

The jurisdictional issue regarding the tenancy was already adjudicated on 24 th August 2023 by Adjudicator Baker. That was not the order that was subject of the rehearing application.

Furthermore, there was no evidence provided to show that substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice occurred with the decision made on 24 th August 2023.

The issue dealt with on 8 th December 2023 was whether or not the premises was an unlawful residential premises.

The landlord provided fresh evidence to the Tribunal on 27 th March 2024 but it failed to establish that the downstairs conversion to self-contained spaces were consented. It was paperwork pertaining to the premises when it was a new build and that it had been “consented’ to. It had nothing to do with the current downstairs conversion.

I do not find that the landlord has proven that there was substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice. The application for rehearing is dismissed. Accordingly, the order from 8 th December 2023 stands.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing on 27 th March 2024 via teleconference.

On 8 th December 2023, the Tribunal made an order for the landlord to refund the full amount of rent paid by the tenant due to the premises being an unlawful residential premises.

Has a substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice occurred?

For the following reasons, the landlord has failed to establish the grounds for a rehearing.

The jurisdictional issue regarding the tenancy was already adjudicated on 24 th August 2023 by Adjudicator Baker. That was not the order that was subject of the rehearing application.

Furthermore, there was no evidence provided to show that substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice occurred with the decision made on 24 th August 2023.

The issue dealt with on 8 th December 2023 was whether or not the premises was an unlawful residential premises.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4570455 — Tenancy dispute at 38A Felton Mathew Avenue, Saint Johns, Auckland 1072

At a glance

Claims & awards

Tenancy Tribunal case 4570455 — Tenancy dispute at 38A Felton Mathew Avenue, Saint Johns, Auckland 1072

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Has a substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice occurred?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Frequently asked questions

Order

Reasons

Has a substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice occurred?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Frequently asked questions