How much money was awarded in case 5053609?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5053609?

The primary dispute was 14-day notice.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5053609?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11138880-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 5053609?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5053609?

The primary dispute was 14-day notice.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5053609?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11138880-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

Unit/Flat 4, 298 Puhinui Road, Papatoetoe, Auckland 2025 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5053609 — 14-day notice

Q: What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5053609 about?

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

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord’s and tenant’s names.

The tenancy of [The tenant/s] at Unit/Flat 4, 298 Puhinui Road, Papatoetoe, Auckland 2025 is terminated, and possession is granted to [The landlord/s] at midnight on Thursday 19 December 2024.

Reasons

The landlord, a social housing provider, attended the hearing today. The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy for assault by the tenant on an agent of the landlord.

A tradesperson, acting as agent for the landlord, went to the premises on 9 September 2024 to perform necessary repairs. While at the premises he was verbally and physically assaulted by a man understood to be the tenant’s partner. The man was holding a hammer while shouting at the tradesman. At one point, the assailant grabbed the tradesperson’s collar while yelling at him. The tradesperson was unharmed but distressed.

Section 55(1)(a) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the Act) provides that the Tribunal “shall” make an order if satisfied that the tenant has assaulted, threatened to assault, or has “caused or permitted” any person to assault or threaten to assault the landlord, or any agent of the landlord.

The tenant did not assault the tradesperson. The tenant was probably at the premises, and it seems likely she had an argument with the man before the incident. The tenant was not involved in the assault and on the available evidence, cannot be said to have caused or permitted it.

However, section 41 of the Act provides that the tenant is responsible for anything done by any person who is at the premises with the tenant’s permission if the act would have constituted a breach of the tenancy agreement if it had been done by the tenant. In other words, the tenant is responsible for an assault committed by her visitors. The available information indicates that the assailant lives or at least regularly frequents the premises and was therefore at the premises with the tenant’s permission.

Unfortunately, the tenant has not responded to the landlord’s requests for a meeting to discuss what happened. This means the Tribunal has not had the benefit of the tenant’s side of the story or any submissions in mitigation. The use of a hammer in the incident makes it more serious in my view. I find it is appropriate to terminate the tenancy. The landlord requested termination in 28 days. Suppression

The landlord requested name suppression for both parties. The landlord has been successful and is entitled to suppression. The Tribunal also has a discretion to grant suppression (section 95A(4)). This requires the Tribunal to consider the interests of the parties and the public interest.

The tenant’s interest is to preserve her privacy. The public interest is in open justice and in the proper administration of public housing. Although I am satisfied that a serious assault took place, the tenant does not appear to have had any direct involvement. I grant suppression. This order was amended on 28 November 2024. The amendment was to the date of termination of the tenancy only.

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord’s and tenant’s names.
The tenancy of [The tenant/s] at Unit/Flat 4, 298 Puhinui Road, Papatoetoe, Auckland 2025 is terminated, and possession is granted to [The landlord/s] at midnight on Thursday 19 December 2024.

Reasons

The landlord, a social housing provider, attended the hearing today. The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy for assault by the tenant on an agent of the landlord.
A tradesperson, acting as agent for the landlord, went to the premises on 9 September 2024 to perform necessary repairs. While at the premises he was verbally and physically assaulted by a man understood to be the tenant’s partner. The man was holding a hammer while shouting at the tradesman. At one point, the assailant grabbed the tradesperson’s collar while yelling at him. The tradesperson was unharmed but distressed.
Section 55(1)(a) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the Act) provides that the Tribunal “shall” make an order if satisfied that the tenant has assaulted, threatened to assault, or has “caused or permitted” any person to assault or threaten to assault the landlord, or any agent of the landlord.
The tenant did not assault the tradesperson. The tenant was probably at the premises, and it seems likely she had an argument with the man before the incident. The tenant was not involved in the assault and on the available evidence, cannot be said to have caused or permitted it.
However, section 41 of the Act provides that the tenant is responsible for anything done by any person who is at the premises with the tenant’s permission if the act would have constituted a breach of the tenancy agreement if it had been done by the tenant. In other words, the tenant is responsible for an assault committed by her visitors. The available information indicates that the assailant lives or at least regularly frequents the premises and was therefore at the premises with the tenant’s permission.
Unfortunately, the tenant has not responded to the landlord’s requests for a meeting to discuss what happened. This means the Tribunal has not had the benefit of the tenant’s side of the story or any submissions in mitigation. The use of a hammer in the incident makes it more serious in my view. I find it is appropriate to terminate the tenancy. The landlord requested termination in 28 days. Suppression
The landlord requested name suppression for both parties. The landlord has been successful and is entitled to suppression. The Tribunal also has a discretion to grant suppression (section 95A(4)). This requires the Tribunal to consider the interests of the parties and the public interest.
The tenant’s interest is to preserve her privacy. The public interest is in open justice and in the proper administration of public housing. Although I am satisfied that a serious assault took place, the tenant does not appear to have had any direct involvement. I grant suppression. This order was amended on 28 November 2024. The amendment was to the date of termination of the tenancy only.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5053609 — 14-day notice at Unit/Flat 4, 298 Puhinui Road, Papatoetoe, Auckland 2025

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5053609 — 14-day notice at Unit/Flat 4, 298 Puhinui Road, Papatoetoe, Auckland 2025

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