What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5050269 about?

The tribunal order states: Both parties’ names along with the identifying details and the tenancy address

How much money was awarded in case 5050269?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5050269?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5050269?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11336253-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5050269 about?

The tribunal order states: Both parties’ names along with the identifying details and the tenancy address

How much money was awarded in case 5050269?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5050269?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5050269?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11336253-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5050269 — Tenancy dispute

Order

Both parties’ names along with the identifying details and the tenancy address are suppressed.
The Tribunal does not have the jurisdiction to determine the application and the matter is dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing, conducted via video conference.
The applicant claims he is a tenant and that the respondent is the landlord.
The applicant seeks the return of rent paid, including rent in lieu of notice. The bond has been returned to the applicant.
There was a preliminary issue as to whether the Tenancy Tribunal has jurisdiction to hear the tenant’s claim which needed to be resolved before any substantive claim might be determined.
The Tribunal has jurisdiction to determine any dispute between a landlord and a tenant, and/or a guarantor of a tenant, that relates to a residential tenancy to which the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) applies (see section 77, RTA). 434508 8 2 The Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to determine disputes between parties other than those in a landlord and tenant relationship.
The key issue here is whether the applicant is a tenant and the respondent is the landlord, or whether the parties are flatmates.
In November 2023 the respondent signed a residential tenancy variation agreement which named him and four others as tenants of this premises. The tenancy agreement and the landlord of record was confirmed during the hearing via document sharing in Teams.
The fifth tenant left the tenancy. The vacant room was rented on a sharing arrangement and the named respondent here acted as “head tenant” by agreement with the remaining three tenants.
A Flat/house sharing agreement between the head tenant and the applicant was signed on 10 September 2024. The template agreement has many of the usual terms, including one regarding the sharing of utilities costs between the “flatmates”.
Section 2, RTA defines a landlord, in relation to any residential premises that are the subject of a tenancy agreement, as the grantor of a tenancy of the premises under the agreement. A tenant is the grantee of a tenancy of the premises under the agreement.
A tenant is someone who rents a property directly from a landlord and who usually has a written tenancy agreement which records that they are the tenant. A flatmate is someone who lives with a tenant, but their name does not appear on the tenancy agreement. Flatmates are not responsible to the landlord for rent and the state of the property. Instead, they are responsible to the tenant for their share of the rent and other outgoings.
Here the respondent is the grantee or tenant of the tenancy under a separate tenancy agreement. He is not the grantor or landlord of the tenancy. The written flat/house sharing agreement establishes that it was always intended that the applicant was a flatmate. For him to be a tenant the landlord would have had to agreed to that change to the tenancy agreement. While that has occurred previously during the respondent’s residency at this premises, there is no evidence that this is the case here.
The Tribunal is not constrained by a contract that designates another jurisdiction. Section 11 RTA provides that any agreement entered into in respect of a tenancy to which this Act applies, and that purports to exclude, modify, or restrict the operation of any such provision, shall be of no effect.
Here, as the applicant stayed for such a short duration, no submission or evidence regarding the practical arrangements over time could be made. I rely mainly on the written agreements sighted. No evidence consistent with a residential landlord/tenant relationship and operation was provided.
I find it more likely than not that the arrangement between the parties is not a tenancy agreement but a flatting arrangement. Therefore the Tribunal does not have any jurisdiction to determine the application. Based on the supporting evidence, the Dispute Tribunal may be the appropriate jurisdiction for any further application.
The application is dismissed. Suppression
Section 95A RTA permits 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.
Given the tenant’s genuine uncertainty regarding jurisdiction, and the decision here, I order suppression of all parties’ details. Orders of the Disputes Tribunal are not made publicly available. Suppression here also ensures the integrity of that.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing, conducted via video conference.

The applicant claims he is a tenant and that the respondent is the landlord.

The applicant seeks the return of rent paid, including rent in lieu of notice. The bond has been returned to the applicant.

There was a preliminary issue as to whether the Tenancy Tribunal has jurisdiction to hear the tenant’s claim which needed to be resolved before any substantive claim might be determined.

The Tribunal has jurisdiction to determine any dispute between a landlord and a tenant, and/or a guarantor of a tenant, that relates to a residential tenancy to which the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) applies (see section 77, RTA). 434508 8 2 The Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to determine disputes between parties other than those in a landlord and tenant relationship.

The key issue here is whether the applicant is a tenant and the respondent is the landlord, or whether the parties are flatmates.

In November 2023 the respondent signed a residential tenancy variation agreement which named him and four others as tenants of this premises. The tenancy agreement and the landlord of record was confirmed during the hearing via document sharing in Teams.

The fifth tenant left the tenancy. The vacant room was rented on a sharing arrangement and the named respondent here acted as “head tenant” by agreement with the remaining three tenants.

A Flat/house sharing agreement between the head tenant and the applicant was signed on 10 September 2024. The template agreement has many of the usual terms, including one regarding the sharing of utilities costs between the “flatmates”.

Section 2, RTA defines a landlord, in relation to any residential premises that are the subject of a tenancy agreement, as the grantor of a tenancy of the premises under the agreement. A tenant is the grantee of a tenancy of the premises under the agreement.

A tenant is someone who rents a property directly from a landlord and who usually has a written tenancy agreement which records that they are the tenant. A flatmate is someone who lives with a tenant, but their name does not appear on the tenancy agreement. Flatmates are not responsible to the landlord for rent and the state of the property. Instead, they are responsible to the tenant for their share of the rent and other outgoings.

Here the respondent is the grantee or tenant of the tenancy under a separate tenancy agreement. He is not the grantor or landlord of the tenancy. The written flat/house sharing agreement establishes that it was always intended that the applicant was a flatmate. For him to be a tenant the landlord would have had to agreed to that change to the tenancy agreement. While that has occurred previously during the respondent’s residency at this premises, there is no evidence that this is the case here.

The Tribunal is not constrained by a contract that designates another jurisdiction. Section 11 RTA provides that any agreement entered into in respect of a tenancy to which this Act applies, and that purports to exclude, modify, or restrict the operation of any such provision, shall be of no effect.

Here, as the applicant stayed for such a short duration, no submission or evidence regarding the practical arrangements over time could be made. I rely mainly on the written agreements sighted. No evidence consistent with a residential landlord/tenant relationship and operation was provided.

I find it more likely than not that the arrangement between the parties is not a tenancy agreement but a flatting arrangement. Therefore the Tribunal does not have any jurisdiction to determine the application. Based on the supporting evidence, the Dispute Tribunal may be the appropriate jurisdiction for any further application.

The application is dismissed. Suppression

Section 95A RTA permits 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.

Given the tenant’s genuine uncertainty regarding jurisdiction, and the decision here, I order suppression of all parties’ details. Orders of the Disputes Tribunal are not made publicly available. Suppression here also ensures the integrity of that.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5050269 — Tenancy dispute

At a glance

Claims & awards

Tenancy Tribunal case 5050269 — Tenancy dispute

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