What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4985956 about?

The tribunal order states: The application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 4985956?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4985956?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4985956?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10990915-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4985956 about?

The tribunal order states: The application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 4985956?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4985956?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4985956?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10990915-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4985956 — Exemplary damages

Tenantcheck Insights

Reasons

Both parties attended this video hearing on 23 October 2024.

The tenant is required to establish the claim to the civil law standard of proof, on the balance of probabilities.

The applicant claimed that the landlord’s notice to terminate the tenancy dated 26 August 2024, to end the tenancy on 28 October 2024 was retaliatory.

For a notice to be declared retaliatory, the tenant must prove that in terminating the tenancy, the landlord was motivated wholly or partly by the tenant exercising a right under the tenancy agreement or any Act, or by any complaint against the landlord. See section 54(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

Giving a termination notice which is declared to be retaliatory is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded, up to a maximum of $6,500.00. See section 54(2), (3) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

The landlord’s notice to terminate the tenancy was dated 26 August 2024.

On 5 September 2024, the tenant gave the landlord 28 days’ notice to terminate the tenancy. That tenant notice has superseded the landlord notice.

This is now a moot issue. The claim that the landlord notice was retaliatory is no longer of significance as the tenancy has been ended at the request of the tenant. Any declaration that the landlord notice was retaliatory would be of no effect. I record that the tenant application to the Tribunal did not include an application for exemplary damages.

The Tribunal does not make orders in matters that are moot (see Memelink v BC 68792 [2021]NZDC 11664 and The Trustees of the Link Trust No 1 v BC 68792 [2022] NZHC 151). There would be no utility in progressing the claim given the subsequent termination by the tenant and even if successful, nothing would change.

The tenant application is dismissed.

Both parties applied for name suppression. The landlord has been wholly successful and suppression of the landlord name and details is ordered. The tenant has not been wholly or substantially successful and the tenant application is dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended this video hearing on 23 October 2024.

The tenant is required to establish the claim to the civil law standard of proof, on the balance of probabilities.

The applicant claimed that the landlord’s notice to terminate the tenancy dated 26 August 2024, to end the tenancy on 28 October 2024 was retaliatory.

The landlord’s notice to terminate the tenancy was dated 26 August 2024.

On 5 September 2024, the tenant gave the landlord 28 days’ notice to terminate the tenancy. That tenant notice has superseded the landlord notice.

The tenant application is dismissed.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4985956 — Exemplary damages

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4985956 — Exemplary damages

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