What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4811261 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenant’s application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 4811261?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4811261?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4811261?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10180939-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4811261 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenant’s application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 4811261?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4811261?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4811261?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10180939-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

3 Wainui Court, Awapuni, Palmerston North 4412 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4811261 — Tenancy dispute

Tenantcheck Insights

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.

The tenant explained that his teenage son fainted and his head hit the bottom pane of glass in a door. The glass broke and lacerated his scalp. This was deeply upsetting to the tenant.

The parties accepted that the glass was not safety glass and that the tenant’s son suffered the injuries claimed.

The tenant claimed that the landlord was in breach of its obligations under section 45(1)(c) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”) which provides that the landlord shall “comply with all requirements in respect of buildings, health, and safety under any enactment so far as they apply to the premises”.

The tenant believes that the landlord was in breach of section 116B of the Building Act 2004 and regulation F2.3.3 of the Building Code.

Section 116B provides that no person may use a building, or knowingly permit another person to use a building, for a use for which the building is not safe or not sanitary.

Regulation F2.3.3 provides that glass if broken on impact shall break in a way which is unlikely to cause injury.

The tenant was deeply concerned that he rented the property without the landlord disclosing that the glass in the door was not safety glass. He believes that the property was not safe and that the landlord should have known this.

The landlord gave evidence that the building was constructed in 1986 and that the Building Act and its regulations do not therefore apply to it, as they do not have retrospective application. The landlord explained that the building complied with the building regulations at the time it was constructed and that there is no legal requirement that it comply with the current regulations, other than to replace the broken pane with safety glass – which it has done. Decision

The tenant has failed to persuade the Tribunal on the balance of probabilities that the landlord had any legal obligation to replace the glass in the premises with safety glass before it was broken and required replacement.

From the evidence before the Tribunal, the landlord had no obligation to ensure that the window glass complied with the Building Act 1991 or 2004. Its obligation was to comply with the relevant legislation and building requirements at the time the building was constructed. There is no evidence before the Tribunal that it did not do so.

The tenant’s claim must be dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.

The tenant explained that his teenage son fainted and his head hit the bottom pane of glass in a door. The glass broke and lacerated his scalp. This was deeply upsetting to the tenant.

The parties accepted that the glass was not safety glass and that the tenant’s son suffered the injuries claimed.

The tenant believes that the landlord was in breach of section 116B of the Building Act 2004 and regulation F2.3.3 of the Building Code.

Section 116B provides that no person may use a building, or knowingly permit another person to use a building, for a use for which the building is not safe or not sanitary.

Regulation F2.3.3 provides that glass if broken on impact shall break in a way which is unlikely to cause injury.

The tenant’s claim must be dismissed.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4811261 — Tenancy dispute at 3 Wainui Court, Awapuni, Palmerston North 4412

At a glance

Claims & awards

Tenancy Tribunal case 4811261 — Tenancy dispute at 3 Wainui Court, Awapuni, Palmerston North 4412

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