What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4955653 about?

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

How much money was awarded in case 4955653?

Costs: $5,534.43 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4955653?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4955653?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11578642-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4955653 about?

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

How much money was awarded in case 4955653?

Costs: $5,534.43 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4955653?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4955653?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11578642-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4955653 — Tenancy dispute

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4955653 — net $5,534.43 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Costs	$5,534.43	Costs
Net award	$5,534.43
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$5,534.43

Both parties attended the hearing. [The landlord’s representative] appeared as Counsel for [The landlord/s] and Mr Greenfield appeared as the representative for Mr Le Roux. Mr Le Roux was not present due to being incarcerated and [The landlord/s] was not present either.

[The landlord’s representative] applied for costs having been instructed as Counsel for [The landlord/s] in these proceedings. On 22 February 2025, Orders were made in favour of [The landlord/s], terminating the tenancy and ordering Mr Le Roux to pay rent arrears of $20,677.00.

[The landlord’s representative] filed submissions in relation to those costs dated 7 March 2025.

Mr Le Roux was given seven days to respond to this.

No response was received by the Tribunal from Mr Le Roux. Landlord costs sought

[The landlord/s] submitted costs should be awarded because legal representation was necessary due to the monetary amount claimed, the risk of losing the property due to the substantial rent arrears, Mr Le Roux’ claims were dismissed due to lack of solid evidence and the costs claimed were reasonable considering the time and effort required for the case.

[The landlord/s] requested $8,385.50 in costs, including GST and other expenses. An invoice was provided by [The landlords/s] to substantiate the costs which [The landlord/s] submitted was fair and reasonable given the circumstances. The Law

Section 102 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”) gives the Tribunal the power to award costs for the expenses incurred in the legal process if any party was represented by a lawyer.

In the District Court case of BC 346799 v Ikeda [2020] NZDC 3669, a reasonable contribution for costs was found to range from 40% to 70% of the actual legal costs incurred. The factors considered by the court in assessing what was reasonable included the parties success, the amount involved, the length of the hearing, time for effective preparation, urgency, abuse of process, arguments without substance, poor presentation and the complexity of the issues. The Judge found a reasonable contribution in that case was 66%.

In applying the relevant law, I consider the appropriate amount to be awarded should be 66% of the [The landlord/s]’s legal costs. Mr Le Roux filed substantial evidence in support of his claims for compensation, there was urgency for [The landlord/s] in terms of the substantial rent arrears, the issues were not complex, Mr Le Roux failed to clearly define their claims for compensation and claims for improvement to the property and both parties had time to prepare effectively for the hearing.

Therefore, I have decided that a 66% contribution to costs is fair and reasonable in this case. 66% of $8385.50 is $5,534.43.

I consider Mr Le Roux must pay $5,534.43 for the costs of his unsuccessful application.

Name suppression continues to be granted for [The landlord/s].

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4955653 — net $5,534.43 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Costs	$5,534.43	Costs
Net award	$5,534.43
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$5,534.43

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlords name and identifying details.
Mr Le Roux shall pay [The landlord/s] $5,534.43 immediately.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. [The landlord’s representative] appeared as Counsel for [The landlord/s] and Mr Greenfield appeared as the representative for Mr Le Roux. Mr Le Roux was not present due to being incarcerated and [The landlord/s] was not present either.
[The landlord’s representative] applied for costs having been instructed as Counsel for [The landlord/s] in these proceedings. On 22 February 2025, Orders were made in favour of [The landlord/s], terminating the tenancy and ordering Mr Le Roux to pay rent arrears of $20,677.00.
[The landlord’s representative] filed submissions in relation to those costs dated 7 March 2025.
Mr Le Roux was given seven days to respond to this.
No response was received by the Tribunal from Mr Le Roux. Landlord costs sought
[The landlord/s] submitted costs should be awarded because legal representation was necessary due to the monetary amount claimed, the risk of losing the property due to the substantial rent arrears, Mr Le Roux’ claims were dismissed due to lack of solid evidence and the costs claimed were reasonable considering the time and effort required for the case.
[The landlord/s] requested $8,385.50 in costs, including GST and other expenses. An invoice was provided by [The landlords/s] to substantiate the costs which [The landlord/s] submitted was fair and reasonable given the circumstances. The Law
Section 102 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”) gives the Tribunal the power to award costs for the expenses incurred in the legal process if any party was represented by a lawyer.
In the District Court case of BC 346799 v Ikeda [2020] NZDC 3669, a reasonable contribution for costs was found to range from 40% to 70% of the actual legal costs incurred. The factors considered by the court in assessing what was reasonable included the parties success, the amount involved, the length of the hearing, time for effective preparation, urgency, abuse of process, arguments without substance, poor presentation and the complexity of the issues. The Judge found a reasonable contribution in that case was 66%.
In applying the relevant law, I consider the appropriate amount to be awarded should be 66% of the [The landlord/s]’s legal costs. Mr Le Roux filed substantial evidence in support of his claims for compensation, there was urgency for [The landlord/s] in terms of the substantial rent arrears, the issues were not complex, Mr Le Roux failed to clearly define their claims for compensation and claims for improvement to the property and both parties had time to prepare effectively for the hearing.
Therefore, I have decided that a 66% contribution to costs is fair and reasonable in this case. 66% of $8385.50 is $5,534.43.
I consider Mr Le Roux must pay $5,534.43 for the costs of his unsuccessful application.
Name suppression continues to be granted for [The landlord/s].

Tenancy Tribunal case 4955653 — Tenancy dispute

At a glance

Award balance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4955653 — Tenancy dispute

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Frequently asked questions