What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4847600 about?

The tribunal order states: The application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 4847600?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4847600?

The primary dispute was Unit Titles.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4847600?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10486429-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4847600 about?

The tribunal order states: The application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 4847600?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4847600?

The primary dispute was Unit Titles.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4847600?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10486429-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4847600 — Unit Titles

Tenantcheck Insights

Order

The application is dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The tenant has applied for a declaration that the notice of termination of tenancy served on the tenant is invalid.
The background can be set out reasonably briefly.
The tenancy commenced in 2020. It is a periodic tenancy.
On 27 January 2024, the landlord served a 90 day notice to terminate the tenancy on the tenant. The grounds for the termination are those set out in s.51(2)(f) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”).
Section 51(2)(f) RTA provides that a landlord may terminate a periodic tenancy by giving at least 90 days’ notice where extensive alteration or renovations are to be carried out and it would not be reasonably practical for the tenant to remain in occupation while the work is carried out and the work is to begin, or a material step towards commencement, within 90 days of the termination date.
The tenant says that the work was not sufficiently extensive that it would have required the tenant to leave the premises. The landlord said that the proposed works were extensive and included both interior and exterior work. The interior work included major renovations of both bathrooms and the kitchen.
The tenant said in evidence that she has now left the premises. That makes this hearing entirely moot. The tenant’s application is for a declaration that the notice of termination was invalid. Whether it was invalid or not, the tenancy has now ended. A declaration would not allow the tenant to return to the premises. The High Court has confirmed that the Tribunal cannot hear moot applications (see Body Corporate 375933 v Tenancy Tribunal and Wellington Waterfront Luxury Apartment Limited (2017) NZHC 1619. The application is dismissed.
Both parties have applied for name suppression. There is no public interest in the publication of the party names and details and suppression is ordered for both the landlord and tenant.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4847600 — Unit Titles

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4847600 — 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