What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5212735 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 5212735?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5212735?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Cleanliness, Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5212735?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12456800-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5212735 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 5212735?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5212735?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Cleanliness, Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5212735?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12456800-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

7 Benchmark Drive, Massey, Auckland 0614 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5212735 — Rent arrears

Tenantcheck Insights

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing by video.

On 28 July 2025 the Tribunal made an order for exemplary damages against Anita Prasad.

On 1 August 2025, Anita Prasad applied for a rehearing on the grounds that the order omitted an award for rent arrears and due to a lack of evidence in relation to the condition of the premises at the commencement of the tenancy.

Section 105(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 provides that the Tribunal has the power to order a rehearing where “a substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice has or may have occurred or is likely to occur”.

Usually the party applying for the rehearing must show that something went wrong with the Tribunal’s procedure, for example, that they did not receive notice of the hearing or they were not able to properly present their case. A rehearing may also be granted where there is new evidence that was not reasonably available at the first hearing, if it could have affected the outcome.

The District Court has held that if the Tribunal was simply wrong in its findings of fact, or its application of the law, this is not sufficient to establish a miscarriage of justice: a rehearing is not an alternative to an appeal. Furthermore, a rehearing will not be granted just because a party is unhappy with the decision, or to give them a second opportunity to present their case.

Has a substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice occurred?

For the following reasons Anita Prasad has failed to establish the grounds for a rehearing.

The applicant did not apply for an award of rent arrears. As rent arrears was not in the application filed by the applicant it was not considered at the hearing or in the order.

The applicant submits that the tenant failed to provide evidence of the condition of the premises at the commencement of the tenancy. The landlord claimed that the tenant had cleaned the premises before moving in but did not take photographs after she carried out the cleaning.

The award for exemplary damages was because the landlord failed to ensure that the premises were reasonably clean and tidy at the beginning of the tenancy. The tenant cleaning the premises is part of the proof that the landlord failed to comply with its obligations. The Tribunal was satisfied with the evidence produced by the tenant in support of the claim for exemplary damages.

An order is made suppressing the tenant’s name on the basis that the landlord has not succeeded with this application for rehearing 1 .

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing by video.

On 28 July 2025 the Tribunal made an order for exemplary damages against Anita Prasad.

Has a substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice occurred?

For the following reasons Anita Prasad has failed to establish the grounds for a rehearing.

The applicant did not apply for an award of rent arrears. As rent arrears was not in the application filed by the applicant it was not considered at the hearing or in the order.

An order is made suppressing the tenant’s name on the basis that the landlord has not succeeded with this application for rehearing 1 .

Tenancy Tribunal case 5212735 — Rent arrears at 7 Benchmark Drive, Massey, Auckland 0614

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5212735 — Rent arrears at 7 Benchmark Drive, Massey, Auckland 0614

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Has a substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice occurred?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Has a substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice occurred?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions