How much money was awarded in case 4693609?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4693609?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4693609?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9656624-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 4693609?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4693609?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4693609?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9656624-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

suppressed] Tenancy Tribunal Case 4693609 — Tenancy dispute

Q: What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4693609 about?

The tribunal order states: An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of both parties’ names and identifying details.
By way of declaration, it is noted that the Tenancy Tribunal does not have jurisdiction over the relationship or agreement between the parties.
The application is dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing which was held by way of teleconference. The hearing was set to establish the jurisdiction of the Tenancy Tribunal over the applications both parties have made.
[The respondent/s] has a tenancy agreement with the landlord of this property. He rented out one of the rooms in the property to [The applicant/s]. In doing so they signed an agreement entitled Fixed Term Tenancy Agreement. It names the parties as head tenant and tenant respectively. It also referenced [The applicant/s]as the flatmate. Importantly, clause 17 of the agreement stated that in the event of any dispute, the parties agree that the dispute will be determined by the Disputes Tribunal.
Neither [The respondent/s] nor [The applicant/s] have any strong view as to whether this was a residential tenancy or not, they just want their dispute resolved.
The Tribunal’s general jurisdiction, under s77(1) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”) is to hear claims between landlords and tenants relating to any tenancy to which the RTA applies. Section 4 RTA provides that it applies to all residential tenancies unless specifically excluded.
Section 2 RTA provides that a “landlord” and “tenant” are respectively grantor and grantee of a tenancy. The terms ’residential premises’, ‘tenancy’, and ‘tenancy agreement’ are defined as: residential premises means any premises used or intended for occupation by any person as a place of residence. tenancy, in relation to any residential premises, means the right to occupy the premises (whether exclusively or otherwise) in consideration for rent. tenancy agreement, in relation to any residential premises, means any express or implied agreement under which any person, for rent, grants or agrees to grant to any other person a tenancy of the premises.
Section 5 of the RTA details exclusions to the RTA. S5(n) specifically excludes arrangements where the premises are being used for residence by the landlord. Such a situation may be one where a tenant has flatmates to help them pay the rent.
In the District Court decision of Musson v Dobrisek, Catley and Low (CIV 2006- 032-36, Judge Broadmore stated, while excluding flatmate relationships from being under the jurisdiction of the Tenancy Tribunal, that “...the use of the word “flatmate” does not in itself define the nature of the legal relationship between a flatmate and any landlord”....By "flatmates" I understand a co-operative arrangement whereby, in a functional sense, all occupants are on the same footing in that they have exclusive occupation of their own rooms and shared use and occupation of common areas such as kitchens."
Section 10 RTA provides that, where a party to proceedings contends that the Act does not apply, they must establish the facts supporting their contention. In other words, they have the burden of proving the RTA does not apply.
Accordingly, The Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to hear disputes between tenants and flatmates; only between tenants and landlords.
The arrangement [The respondent/s] and [The applicant/s] had was clearly a flatmate arrangement. They shared bills and duties for the home but at the end of the day, [The respondent/s] was responsible to the landlord for the property. They did not envisage, nor did they contract for the specific rights and responsibilities given by the RTA to apply to their situation. I am therefore satisfied that their arrangement is excluded from the jurisdiction of the Tenancy Tribunal.
Accordingly, the application is dismissed and if either [The respondent/s] or [The applicant/s] wishes to progress their claims, they will need to file them with the Disputes Tribunal. Suppression
Given that neither party was clearly aware of the issues as to jurisdiction, it is not proportionate that their names be published. Accordingly, pursuant to s95A of the RTA, I direct that both party details be suppressed.

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of both parties’ names and identifying details.

By way of declaration, it is noted that the Tenancy Tribunal does not have jurisdiction over the relationship or agreement between the parties.

The application is dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing which was held by way of teleconference. The hearing was set to establish the jurisdiction of the Tenancy Tribunal over the applications both parties have made.

[The respondent/s] has a tenancy agreement with the landlord of this property. He rented out one of the rooms in the property to [The applicant/s]. In doing so they signed an agreement entitled Fixed Term Tenancy Agreement. It names the parties as head tenant and tenant respectively. It also referenced [The applicant/s]as the flatmate. Importantly, clause 17 of the agreement stated that in the event of any dispute, the parties agree that the dispute will be determined by the Disputes Tribunal.

Neither [The respondent/s] nor [The applicant/s] have any strong view as to whether this was a residential tenancy or not, they just want their dispute resolved.

The Tribunal’s general jurisdiction, under s77(1) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”) is to hear claims between landlords and tenants relating to any tenancy to which the RTA applies. Section 4 RTA provides that it applies to all residential tenancies unless specifically excluded.

Section 2 RTA provides that a “landlord” and “tenant” are respectively grantor and grantee of a tenancy. The terms ’residential premises’, ‘tenancy’, and ‘tenancy agreement’ are defined as: residential premises means any premises used or intended for occupation by any person as a place of residence. tenancy, in relation to any residential premises, means the right to occupy the premises (whether exclusively or otherwise) in consideration for rent. tenancy agreement, in relation to any residential premises, means any express or implied agreement under which any person, for rent, grants or agrees to grant to any other person a tenancy of the premises.

Section 5 of the RTA details exclusions to the RTA. S5(n) specifically excludes arrangements where the premises are being used for residence by the landlord. Such a situation may be one where a tenant has flatmates to help them pay the rent.

In the District Court decision of Musson v Dobrisek, Catley and Low (CIV 2006- 032-36, Judge Broadmore stated, while excluding flatmate relationships from being under the jurisdiction of the Tenancy Tribunal, that “...the use of the word “flatmate” does not in itself define the nature of the legal relationship between a flatmate and any landlord”....By "flatmates" I understand a co-operative arrangement whereby, in a functional sense, all occupants are on the same footing in that they have exclusive occupation of their own rooms and shared use and occupation of common areas such as kitchens."

Section 10 RTA provides that, where a party to proceedings contends that the Act does not apply, they must establish the facts supporting their contention. In other words, they have the burden of proving the RTA does not apply.

Accordingly, The Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to hear disputes between tenants and flatmates; only between tenants and landlords.

The arrangement [The respondent/s] and [The applicant/s] had was clearly a flatmate arrangement. They shared bills and duties for the home but at the end of the day, [The respondent/s] was responsible to the landlord for the property. They did not envisage, nor did they contract for the specific rights and responsibilities given by the RTA to apply to their situation. I am therefore satisfied that their arrangement is excluded from the jurisdiction of the Tenancy Tribunal.

Accordingly, the application is dismissed and if either [The respondent/s] or [The applicant/s] wishes to progress their claims, they will need to file them with the Disputes Tribunal. Suppression

Given that neither party was clearly aware of the issues as to jurisdiction, it is not proportionate that their names be published. Accordingly, pursuant to s95A of the RTA, I direct that both party details be suppressed.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4693609 — Tenancy dispute at suppressed]

At a glance

Claims & awards

Tenancy Tribunal case 4693609 — Tenancy dispute at suppressed]

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Frequently asked questions

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Frequently asked questions