What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5051093 about?

The tribunal order states: The suppression of the tenant’s name and details in this application 5051093

How much money was awarded in case 5051093?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5051093?

The primary dispute was State of repair. Related themes: Healthy homes, Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5051093?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13825121-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5051093 about?

The tribunal order states: The suppression of the tenant’s name and details in this application 5051093

How much money was awarded in case 5051093?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5051093?

The primary dispute was State of repair. Related themes: Healthy homes, Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5051093?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13825121-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

73 Calthorp Close, Favona, Auckland 2024 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5051093 — State of repair

Reasons

On the 10 May 2025 I issued a final decision in these applications.

As the tenant was mostly successful in her claims, I granted name suppression to the tenant as requested. I declined the landlord’s application for name suppression.

The tenant has now requested that the name suppression order in her favour be lifted.

Section 95A Residential Tenancies Act 1986, is the provision that governs how the Tribunal should address suppression orders. Suppression must be awarded to a party who requests it (either in the application or at hearing) if the party has been or substantially successful in their claim, and the public interest or the conduct of the party does not overwide that interest. 1 1 S95A(1) RTA.

Section 95A(4) further provides: (4) 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order that all or part of the evidence given or the name or any identifying particulars of any witness or party not be published. (5) An order under subsection (4) may be made subject to any conditions that the Tribunal considers appropriate.

The tenant in asking for the suppression to be lifted; in an email to the Tribunal of the 26 June 2026 she says: I wish to have the opportunity to openly share my family’s experience and speak publicly about the circumstances surrounding these cases. My son’s health journey and condition have already been shared publicly, and I believe being able to speak openly about our experience may help raise awareness for other families facing similar housing and health concerns. The matters involved in these cases have had a significant impact on our family, and I feel that sharing our story could help educate others about the importance of healthy homes and the potential consequences when housing issues are not addressed appropriately.

The starting point in all claims before the Tribunal is that they are open to the public. In Alexis Mitzel v A1 Property Managers Ltd [2026] NZDC 6894 the Court said: As I have already noted the Tribunal is, in general terms at least, a public forum and its proceedings and its decisions are, subject to any suppression orders made, open to perusal by the public. That is because of the longstanding convention in New Zealand that Courts operate in the public. 2

There is public interest in both how the Tribunal conducts its hearings and the outcome of those hearings.

There is provision in other jurisdictions for suppression orders to be varied or lifted especially if that is requested by the person who has name suppression. 3

I consider that the tenant can request that her name suppression be lifted after the decision has been made pursuant to s95A(4) RTA and that it is in the public interest to lift the tenant’s name suppression in this matter so the tenant can freely discuss the decision.

I consider that there is significant public interest in decisions which have determined that the landlord failed to maintain the premises and have awarded 2 Paragraph 12. 3 See R v Thomson [2020] NZDC 13465, where the victim of the offending requested that name suppression be lifted. exemplary damages, especially when the condition of the property may have had an impact on the health on the people who live at the property.

The tenant’s name suppression is revoked. There are no suppression orders that attach to my decision of the 10 May 2025.

Order

The suppression of the tenant’s name and details in this application 5051093 and 4961993 is lifted. The names and details of the parties may now be published.
The order dated 10 May 2025 may be published without further restriction.

Reasons

On the 10 May 2025 I issued a final decision in these applications.
As the tenant was mostly successful in her claims, I granted name suppression to the tenant as requested. I declined the landlord’s application for name suppression.
The tenant has now requested that the name suppression order in her favour be lifted.
Section 95A Residential Tenancies Act 1986, is the provision that governs how the Tribunal should address suppression orders. Suppression must be awarded to a party who requests it (either in the application or at hearing) if the party has been or substantially successful in their claim, and the public interest or the conduct of the party does not overwide that interest. 1 1 S95A(1) RTA.
Section 95A(4) further provides: (4) 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. (5) An order under subsection (4) may be made subject to any conditions that the Tribunal considers appropriate.
The tenant in asking for the suppression to be lifted; in an email to the Tribunal of the 26 June 2026 she says: I wish to have the opportunity to openly share my family’s experience and speak publicly about the circumstances surrounding these cases. My son’s health journey and condition have already been shared publicly, and I believe being able to speak openly about our experience may help raise awareness for other families facing similar housing and health concerns. The matters involved in these cases have had a significant impact on our family, and I feel that sharing our story could help educate others about the importance of healthy homes and the potential consequences when housing issues are not addressed appropriately.
The starting point in all claims before the Tribunal is that they are open to the public. In Alexis Mitzel v A1 Property Managers Ltd [2026] NZDC 6894 the Court said: As I have already noted the Tribunal is, in general terms at least, a public forum and its proceedings and its decisions are, subject to any suppression orders made, open to perusal by the public. That is because of the longstanding convention in New Zealand that Courts operate in the public. 2
There is public interest in both how the Tribunal conducts its hearings and the outcome of those hearings.
There is provision in other jurisdictions for suppression orders to be varied or lifted especially if that is requested by the person who has name suppression. 3
I consider that the tenant can request that her name suppression be lifted after the decision has been made pursuant to s95A(4) RTA and that it is in the public interest to lift the tenant’s name suppression in this matter so the tenant can freely discuss the decision.
I consider that there is significant public interest in decisions which have determined that the landlord failed to maintain the premises and have awarded 2 Paragraph 12. 3 See R v Thomson [2020] NZDC 13465, where the victim of the offending requested that name suppression be lifted. exemplary damages, especially when the condition of the property may have had an impact on the health on the people who live at the property.
The tenant’s name suppression is revoked. There are no suppression orders that attach to my decision of the 10 May 2025.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5051093 — State of repair at 73 Calthorp Close, Favona, Auckland 2024

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5051093 — State of repair at 73 Calthorp Close, Favona, Auckland 2024

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions