What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4775358 about?

The tribunal order states: Bruce Gillespie And Corena Rhodes Gillespie As Trustees For Paradiso Stud

How much money was awarded in case 4775358?

Compensation: Quiet Enjoyment: $1,500.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4775358?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4775358?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10105796-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4775358 about?

The tribunal order states: Bruce Gillespie And Corena Rhodes Gillespie As Trustees For Paradiso Stud

How much money was awarded in case 4775358?

Compensation: Quiet Enjoyment: $1,500.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4775358?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4775358?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10105796-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4775358 — Tenancy dispute

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4775358 — net $1,520.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation: Quiet enjoyment	$1,500.00	Quiet enjoyment
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,520.44
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$1,520.44

Order

Bruce Gillespie And Corena Rhodes Gillespie As Trustees For Paradiso Stud Limited must pay [The tenant/s] $1,520.44 immediately, calculated as shown in table below:

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The tenant sought compensation and exemplary damages.
A party who brings a claim to the Tenancy Tribunal must prove on the balance of probabilities (more likely than not) that their version of events took place. Independent witnesses, corroborating documents and photographs are an important part of discharging this burden of proof.
The issue of evidence at Tenancy Tribunal hearings was considered by the District Court in Kaipo v Clarke & McCarthy (DC) TT233/02. Judge Mather stated: “...[the applicant] needs to be reminded that like anyone who brings an application before a Tribunal or a Court, it is incumbent upon the applicant to provide the evidence necessary to prove the case. If the applicant fails to do that, then their application will be dismissed whether it has merit or not because it is up to the applicant to provide the necessary evidence. It is not up to the other parties and it is certainly not up to the Tribunal to extract evidence.”
When considering claims, the Tribunal must consider s 85 RTA which provides that the Tribunal shall determine a dispute according to the substantial merits and justice of the case and in doing so, shall have regard for the law but shall not be bound to give legal effect to strict legal rights or obligations or to legal forms or technicalities. This provision recognises that, although applying established legal principles will generally produce a fair result, there are circumstances where it will not. In this situation, the Tribunal is entitled to depart from the strict application of the law to achieve a just outcome. Equally, where the law is uncertain, the Tribunal may adapt an approach that best meets the merits and justice of the case.
In the decision that follows I may not have referred to all the oral testimony and other evidence presented, but the parties should know it has been considered. Background
This tenancy commenced on 5 May 2023. There was no written tenancy agreement despite the tenant stating she requested one a number of times. The introduction of the premises and the opportunity was via a mutual friend. The tenant was living in Invercargill at that time.
Unfortunately, due to personal circumstances the landlords had to sell the property. A precursor to doing this was a need to amend driveway access and boundaries. The work was done by the landlord and contractors.
There was a sense of urgency by the landlord to conclude the precursor tasks which meant work being carried out during antisocial hours with an impact on the tenant’s reasonable access to the premises.
The tenant believed she was promised a 5-to-10-year tenancy. There is no written evidence to support this and the tenancy was a periodic one. Given such an expectation the earlier ending of the tenancy will have been disappointing to the tenant.
During most of the tenancy the tenant had a flatmate living with her. Quiet enjoyment
A landlord must not interfere with the reasonable peace, comfort or privacy of the tenant in their use of the premises (see s 38(2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986). Breaching this obligation in circumstances that amount to harassment is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $3,000.00 (see s 38(3) and Schedule 1A RTA).
Where a party has committed an unlawful act intentionally, the Tribunal may award exemplary damages where it is satisfied that it would be just to do so, having regard to the party’s intent, the effect of the unlawful act, the interests of the other party, and the public interest (see s 109(3) RTA).
Harassment means "to trouble, worry or distress" or "to wear out, tire, or exhaust" and "indicates a particular pattern of behaviour directed towards another person" (MacDonald v Dodds, CIV-2009-019-001524, DC Hamilton, 26 February 2010).
Black’s Law Dictionary defines harassment as: Words, conduct, or action (usu. repeated or persistent) that, being directed at a specific person, annoys, alarms, or causes substantial emotional distress in that person and serves no legitimate purpose.
These definitions suggest there must be evidence of some ongoing intentional actions directed at a specific person which causes distress to them. Therefore, a single act of interference with the tenant’s quiet enjoyment would be unlikely to amount to harassment. However, in Whatiura v Shoulder [1987] NZTT Palmerston North TT 12/87, the Adjudicator noted that: although the term usually refers to repeated acts of some kind, I take the view that it can extend to a single act on one occasion of sufficient seriousness.
There were two periods of landlord activity that I consider unreasonably impacted the tenant’s quiet enjoyment. The elapsed time for this impact has been determined as five weeks and I have applied a $300 per week compensation sum. This totals $1500.00 compensation paid to the tenant.
Given the tenant was receiving rent from a flatmate, the compensation is effectively a rent rebate for the five weeks. This is more generous than may have been determined based solely on the activities undertaken. I have considered the actions or behaviours of the landlord during this period amplified the detrimental impact on the tenant in setting this amount.
I do not consider the behaviours to reach the threshold to be considered harassment and as such attract any order for exemplary damages. Other matters Curtains
It is generally and implied term of every tenancy agreement that curtains are provided for windows, particularly in bedrooms for privacy and comfort for sleeping.
This property had a pleasant rural aspect. The viewing of that was maximised through use of large windows. The preference of the owners had been to enjoy the view without any window covering. This is not the case of the tenant which is understandable given the continued presence of the landlord or others within close proximity of the premises. The tenant installed curtains in the master bedroom but was later compensated for the cost of this by the landlords. The need for the curtains was justified in the compensation appropriate. No further orders are needed. Electricity
The tenant is responsible for all outgoings in respect of the premises that are exclusively attributable to the tenant’s occupation of the premises or to the tenant’s use of the facilities (see s 39 RTA).
There was an external water pump that powered by the tenant’s electricity. By the time of the hearing the landlord had calculated and compensated for the use of that pump. Having reviewed the calculations I agree the tenant has been adequately compensated for any non-exclusive use of electricity. Other interactions
There were a number of other instances recounted and some messages provided. These do not reflect positively on the landlord but equally, as acknowledged by the tenant, at times on the tenant. Application filing fee
Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee. Suppression
Section 95A RTA states regarding suppression orders that the Tribunal must, on the application of a party that has wholly or substantially succeeded in proceedings, order that the party’s name or identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the party’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.
Further, the Tribunal may, on the application of any party to proceedings or on its own initiative, having regard to the interests of the parties and to the public interest, order that all or part of the evidence given or the name or any identifying particulars of any witness or party not be published.
The tenant requested suppression in her application. As she has been substantially successful, suppression is ordered.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4775358 — net $1,520.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation: Quiet enjoyment	$1,500.00	Quiet enjoyment
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,520.44
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$1,520.44

Order

Bruce Gillespie And Corena Rhodes Gillespie As Trustees For Paradiso Stud Limited must pay [The tenant/s] $1,520.44 immediately, calculated as shown in table below:

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The tenant sought compensation and exemplary damages.
A party who brings a claim to the Tenancy Tribunal must prove on the balance of probabilities (more likely than not) that their version of events took place. Independent witnesses, corroborating documents and photographs are an important part of discharging this burden of proof.
The issue of evidence at Tenancy Tribunal hearings was considered by the District Court in Kaipo v Clarke & McCarthy (DC) TT233/02. Judge Mather stated: “...[the applicant] needs to be reminded that like anyone who brings an application before a Tribunal or a Court, it is incumbent upon the applicant to provide the evidence necessary to prove the case. If the applicant fails to do that, then their application will be dismissed whether it has merit or not because it is up to the applicant to provide the necessary evidence. It is not up to the other parties and it is certainly not up to the Tribunal to extract evidence.”
When considering claims, the Tribunal must consider s 85 RTA which provides that the Tribunal shall determine a dispute according to the substantial merits and justice of the case and in doing so, shall have regard for the law but shall not be bound to give legal effect to strict legal rights or obligations or to legal forms or technicalities. This provision recognises that, although applying established legal principles will generally produce a fair result, there are circumstances where it will not. In this situation, the Tribunal is entitled to depart from the strict application of the law to achieve a just outcome. Equally, where the law is uncertain, the Tribunal may adapt an approach that best meets the merits and justice of the case.
In the decision that follows I may not have referred to all the oral testimony and other evidence presented, but the parties should know it has been considered. Background
This tenancy commenced on 5 May 2023. There was no written tenancy agreement despite the tenant stating she requested one a number of times. The introduction of the premises and the opportunity was via a mutual friend. The tenant was living in Invercargill at that time.
Unfortunately, due to personal circumstances the landlords had to sell the property. A precursor to doing this was a need to amend driveway access and boundaries. The work was done by the landlord and contractors.
There was a sense of urgency by the landlord to conclude the precursor tasks which meant work being carried out during antisocial hours with an impact on the tenant’s reasonable access to the premises.
The tenant believed she was promised a 5-to-10-year tenancy. There is no written evidence to support this and the tenancy was a periodic one. Given such an expectation the earlier ending of the tenancy will have been disappointing to the tenant.
During most of the tenancy the tenant had a flatmate living with her. Quiet enjoyment
A landlord must not interfere with the reasonable peace, comfort or privacy of the tenant in their use of the premises (see s 38(2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986). Breaching this obligation in circumstances that amount to harassment is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $3,000.00 (see s 38(3) and Schedule 1A RTA).
Where a party has committed an unlawful act intentionally, the Tribunal may award exemplary damages where it is satisfied that it would be just to do so, having regard to the party’s intent, the effect of the unlawful act, the interests of the other party, and the public interest (see s 109(3) RTA).
Harassment means "to trouble, worry or distress" or "to wear out, tire, or exhaust" and "indicates a particular pattern of behaviour directed towards another person" (MacDonald v Dodds, CIV-2009-019-001524, DC Hamilton, 26 February 2010).
Black’s Law Dictionary defines harassment as: Words, conduct, or action (usu. repeated or persistent) that, being directed at a specific person, annoys, alarms, or causes substantial emotional distress in that person and serves no legitimate purpose.
These definitions suggest there must be evidence of some ongoing intentional actions directed at a specific person which causes distress to them. Therefore, a single act of interference with the tenant’s quiet enjoyment would be unlikely to amount to harassment. However, in Whatiura v Shoulder [1987] NZTT Palmerston North TT 12/87, the Adjudicator noted that: although the term usually refers to repeated acts of some kind, I take the view that it can extend to a single act on one occasion of sufficient seriousness.
There were two periods of landlord activity that I consider unreasonably impacted the tenant’s quiet enjoyment. The elapsed time for this impact has been determined as five weeks and I have applied a $300 per week compensation sum. This totals $1500.00 compensation paid to the tenant.
Given the tenant was receiving rent from a flatmate, the compensation is effectively a rent rebate for the five weeks. This is more generous than may have been determined based solely on the activities undertaken. I have considered the actions or behaviours of the landlord during this period amplified the detrimental impact on the tenant in setting this amount.
I do not consider the behaviours to reach the threshold to be considered harassment and as such attract any order for exemplary damages. Other matters Curtains
It is generally and implied term of every tenancy agreement that curtains are provided for windows, particularly in bedrooms for privacy and comfort for sleeping.
This property had a pleasant rural aspect. The viewing of that was maximised through use of large windows. The preference of the owners had been to enjoy the view without any window covering. This is not the case of the tenant which is understandable given the continued presence of the landlord or others within close proximity of the premises. The tenant installed curtains in the master bedroom but was later compensated for the cost of this by the landlords. The need for the curtains was justified in the compensation appropriate. No further orders are needed. Electricity
The tenant is responsible for all outgoings in respect of the premises that are exclusively attributable to the tenant’s occupation of the premises or to the tenant’s use of the facilities (see s 39 RTA).
There was an external water pump that powered by the tenant’s electricity. By the time of the hearing the landlord had calculated and compensated for the use of that pump. Having reviewed the calculations I agree the tenant has been adequately compensated for any non-exclusive use of electricity. Other interactions
There were a number of other instances recounted and some messages provided. These do not reflect positively on the landlord but equally, as acknowledged by the tenant, at times on the tenant. Application filing fee
Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee. Suppression
Section 95A RTA states regarding suppression orders that the Tribunal must, on the application of a party that has wholly or substantially succeeded in proceedings, order that the party’s name or identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the party’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.
Further, the Tribunal may, on the application of any party to proceedings or on its own initiative, having regard to the interests of the parties and to the public interest, order that all or part of the evidence given or the name or any identifying particulars of any witness or party not be published.
The tenant requested suppression in her application. As she has been substantially successful, suppression is ordered.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4775358 — Tenancy dispute

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4775358 — Tenancy dispute

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions