What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5183558 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 5183558?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5183558?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5183558?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11783988-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5183558 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 5183558?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5183558?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5183558?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11783988-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5183558 — Exemplary damages

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord’s name and identifying details.
The application is dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. The landlord’s representatives attended together with one of the owners. Both tenants attended as well. Background
The tenancy started on 3 June 2023 and ended on 4 December 2024 after the landlord gave 63 days’ notice to terminate the tenancy by letter dated 2 October 2024.
The landlord gave notice to terminate the tenancy because the owners required the premises for use by family members from overseas.
Thy tenancy was initially a 1-year fixed term tenancy which was then extended for 3 months after which it became a period tenancy.
The tenants were building a house, and the flexibility of that arrangement suited them because the completion date for the build kept changing.
After the landlord gave notice to terminate the tenancy the tenants did not discuss any further extensions; they vacated the tenancy as required on 4 December 2024.
On 9 March 2025 the tenants made their application to the Tribunal. They had noticed that the premises remained empty, so they claim that the termination was unlawful as the owner, or a member of the owners’ family, had not taken possession within the required 90 days.
The tenants also referred to an incident between them and the owners on 11 October 2024 which they allege breached their quiet enjoyment. They seek compensation for that. Issues
The issues the Tribunal must determine are these: •Did the landlord unlawfully terminate the tenancy? If so, should the Tribunal award the tenants exemplary damages? •Did the landlord (the owners) breach the tenants’ quiet enjoyment. If so, should the Tribunal award the tenants compensation? Relevant statutory provisions
Section 51(1)(a) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) allows a landlord to terminate a periodic tenancy by giving 63 days’ notice if the owner of the premises requires the premises, within 90 days after the termination date, as the principal place of residence for at least 90 days for the owner or a member of the owner’s family.
Section 60AA RTA provides that a landlord commits an unlawful act if they give or purport to give a notice to terminate to the tenant or apply or purport to apply to the Tribunal for an order terminating the tenancy knowing that they are not entitled, under the Act, to give notice or to make the application.
Section 38 RTA provides that the tenant shall be entitled to have quiet enjoyment of the premises without any interruption by the landlord. It also provides that the landlord shall not cause or permit any interference with the reasonable peace, comfort, or privacy of the tenant in the use of the premises by the tenant. Relevant legal considerations
The Tribunal may award compensation to a tenant for losses arising from a proven breach or breaches by the landlord of their statutory responsibilities. Compensation is generally awarded for actual losses and sometimes for less tangible effects of proven breaches such as a loss of enjoyment of the tenancy and the accompanying stress and anxiety.
In Birch v Ōtautahi Community Housing Trust 1 the District Court confirmed that the Tribunal must consider the following factors when deciding to award compensation: • The nature of the breach; • The duration of the breach; and • The effect of the breach on the party.
Exemplary damages are different. They are designed to punish and to deter. They are like a fine.
Exemplary damages are awarded at the Tribunal’s discretion when one party has proved that the other party has committed a defined unlawful act. If that is proven, and before the Tribunal may award exemplary damages, it must take account of the factors set out in section 109 RTA. Those factors are: •The intention of the person; •The effect of the unlawful act; •The interests of the party against whom the unlawful act was committed; and 1 [2020] NZDC 17667 •The public interest. Discussion Did the landlord unlawfully terminate the tenancy? if so, should the

Tribunal award the tenants exemplary damages?

The landlord produced evidence that the intention to use the premises for the owners’ family from overseas was discussed with the property manager from at least 25 September 2024. The owners said they did not want to cause the tenants disruption, but they thought their family members would arrive by the end of the year.
The landlord also produced evidence to confirm that Immigration New Zealand accepted an application for residency for the family members, an application made in November 2023 with an initial expected processing time of 8 months.
Due to government immigration policy changes, the timeframe no longer applies, and the application remains at the processing stage.
The tenants described the inconvenience they were put to by having to vacate the tenancy, compounded by the terminal illness of a family member.
The Tribunal acknowledges the difficulties the tenants faced. However, based on the evidence provided by the landlord, it cannot conclude that the tenancy was unlawfully terminated. The intention to use the premises for a family member was well documented. And the owners reasonably expected that the residency application would be finalised by the end of 2024.
That the owners’ family members have been unable to relocate does not make the notice to terminate unlawful. The premises have not been re-tenanted. They are awaiting the arrival of the family members (expected now in July 2025) so the original intention remains.
Without a finding that the tenancy was unlawfully terminated, the Tribunal cannot award exemplary damages. The landlord has not committed any unlawful act. I dismiss this part of the application. Did the landlord (the owners) breach the tenants’ quiet enjoyment. If so, should the Tribunal award the tenants compensation?
The owners of the property went to assess work they wanted to do, on 11 October 2024. They were on the common driveway. One of the tenants and her daughter, working from home, became alarmed, because they noticed the owners (whom they did not know) near their vehicle.
A verbal altercation developed, and the tenant phoned the police when the owners would not leave after being asked repeatedly. Each party states that the other was ‘yelling’.
The restrictions on a landlord’s right of entry apply to the premises. Premises does not include land or facilities – see section 48(7) RTA.
Here, what happened was poor behaviour with yelling and shouting. But poor behaviour in a context such as this where the owners did not enter the premises does not constitute a breach of quiet enjoyment as it does not relate to the use of the premises; it took place off the premises. It was a one-off, time-limited event that caused hurt feelings and some concern to the tenants (and according to the owner to them also). It is not an event of a kind that would justify sanction by the Tribunal.
It follows that the Tribunal makes no award of compensation because a breach by the landlord has not been established. Result
For the reasons given, the tenants’ application is dismissed. Name suppression
Both parties sought an order for name suppression. The tenants are not entitled to name suppression as the application is unsuccessful. The landlord is entitled to name suppression as its defence to the application is successful.

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord’s name and identifying details.
The application is dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. The landlord’s representatives attended together with one of the owners. Both tenants attended as well. Background
The tenancy started on 3 June 2023 and ended on 4 December 2024 after the landlord gave 63 days’ notice to terminate the tenancy by letter dated 2 October 2024.
The landlord gave notice to terminate the tenancy because the owners required the premises for use by family members from overseas.
Thy tenancy was initially a 1-year fixed term tenancy which was then extended for 3 months after which it became a period tenancy.
The tenants were building a house, and the flexibility of that arrangement suited them because the completion date for the build kept changing.
After the landlord gave notice to terminate the tenancy the tenants did not discuss any further extensions; they vacated the tenancy as required on 4 December 2024.
On 9 March 2025 the tenants made their application to the Tribunal. They had noticed that the premises remained empty, so they claim that the termination was unlawful as the owner, or a member of the owners’ family, had not taken possession within the required 90 days.
The tenants also referred to an incident between them and the owners on 11 October 2024 which they allege breached their quiet enjoyment. They seek compensation for that. Issues
The issues the Tribunal must determine are these: •Did the landlord unlawfully terminate the tenancy? If so, should the Tribunal award the tenants exemplary damages? •Did the landlord (the owners) breach the tenants’ quiet enjoyment. If so, should the Tribunal award the tenants compensation? Relevant statutory provisions
Section 51(1)(a) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) allows a landlord to terminate a periodic tenancy by giving 63 days’ notice if the owner of the premises requires the premises, within 90 days after the termination date, as the principal place of residence for at least 90 days for the owner or a member of the owner’s family.
Section 60AA RTA provides that a landlord commits an unlawful act if they give or purport to give a notice to terminate to the tenant or apply or purport to apply to the Tribunal for an order terminating the tenancy knowing that they are not entitled, under the Act, to give notice or to make the application.
Section 38 RTA provides that the tenant shall be entitled to have quiet enjoyment of the premises without any interruption by the landlord. It also provides that the landlord shall not cause or permit any interference with the reasonable peace, comfort, or privacy of the tenant in the use of the premises by the tenant. Relevant legal considerations
The Tribunal may award compensation to a tenant for losses arising from a proven breach or breaches by the landlord of their statutory responsibilities. Compensation is generally awarded for actual losses and sometimes for less tangible effects of proven breaches such as a loss of enjoyment of the tenancy and the accompanying stress and anxiety.
In Birch v Ōtautahi Community Housing Trust 1 the District Court confirmed that the Tribunal must consider the following factors when deciding to award compensation: • The nature of the breach; • The duration of the breach; and • The effect of the breach on the party.
Exemplary damages are different. They are designed to punish and to deter. They are like a fine.
Exemplary damages are awarded at the Tribunal’s discretion when one party has proved that the other party has committed a defined unlawful act. If that is proven, and before the Tribunal may award exemplary damages, it must take account of the factors set out in section 109 RTA. Those factors are: •The intention of the person; •The effect of the unlawful act; •The interests of the party against whom the unlawful act was committed; and 1 [2020] NZDC 17667 •The public interest. Discussion Did the landlord unlawfully terminate the tenancy? if so, should the

Tribunal award the tenants exemplary damages?

The landlord produced evidence that the intention to use the premises for the owners’ family from overseas was discussed with the property manager from at least 25 September 2024. The owners said they did not want to cause the tenants disruption, but they thought their family members would arrive by the end of the year.
The landlord also produced evidence to confirm that Immigration New Zealand accepted an application for residency for the family members, an application made in November 2023 with an initial expected processing time of 8 months.
Due to government immigration policy changes, the timeframe no longer applies, and the application remains at the processing stage.
The tenants described the inconvenience they were put to by having to vacate the tenancy, compounded by the terminal illness of a family member.
The Tribunal acknowledges the difficulties the tenants faced. However, based on the evidence provided by the landlord, it cannot conclude that the tenancy was unlawfully terminated. The intention to use the premises for a family member was well documented. And the owners reasonably expected that the residency application would be finalised by the end of 2024.
That the owners’ family members have been unable to relocate does not make the notice to terminate unlawful. The premises have not been re-tenanted. They are awaiting the arrival of the family members (expected now in July 2025) so the original intention remains.
Without a finding that the tenancy was unlawfully terminated, the Tribunal cannot award exemplary damages. The landlord has not committed any unlawful act. I dismiss this part of the application. Did the landlord (the owners) breach the tenants’ quiet enjoyment. If so, should the Tribunal award the tenants compensation?
The owners of the property went to assess work they wanted to do, on 11 October 2024. They were on the common driveway. One of the tenants and her daughter, working from home, became alarmed, because they noticed the owners (whom they did not know) near their vehicle.
A verbal altercation developed, and the tenant phoned the police when the owners would not leave after being asked repeatedly. Each party states that the other was ‘yelling’.
The restrictions on a landlord’s right of entry apply to the premises. Premises does not include land or facilities – see section 48(7) RTA.
Here, what happened was poor behaviour with yelling and shouting. But poor behaviour in a context such as this where the owners did not enter the premises does not constitute a breach of quiet enjoyment as it does not relate to the use of the premises; it took place off the premises. It was a one-off, time-limited event that caused hurt feelings and some concern to the tenants (and according to the owner to them also). It is not an event of a kind that would justify sanction by the Tribunal.
It follows that the Tribunal makes no award of compensation because a breach by the landlord has not been established. Result
For the reasons given, the tenants’ application is dismissed. Name suppression
Both parties sought an order for name suppression. The tenants are not entitled to name suppression as the application is unsuccessful. The landlord is entitled to name suppression as its defence to the application is successful.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5183558 — Exemplary damages

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5183558 — Exemplary damages

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Tribunal award the tenants exemplary damages?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Tribunal award the tenants exemplary damages?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions