What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5245237?

The tribunal order states: The applicant’s claim is struck out for want of jurisdiction.

How much money was awarded in case 5245237?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5245237?

The primary dispute was Boarding House.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5245237?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11997892-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5245237?

The tribunal order states: The applicant’s claim is struck out for want of jurisdiction.

How much money was awarded in case 5245237?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5245237?

The primary dispute was Boarding House.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5245237?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11997892-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

14 Seine Road, Forrest Hill, Auckland 0620 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5245237 — Boarding House

Tenantcheck Insights

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Reasons

The applicant attended the hearing which was conducted by telephone. Ms Wang attended the hearing on behalf of the respondent. An interpreter attended the hearing to assist the Tribunal and the respondent.

The applicant has applied for refund of a bond paid to the respondent.

Does the Tribunal have jurisdiction to hear this claim?

The preliminary matter I must determine is whether the Tribunal has jurisdiction to consider this claim. The Tribunal can only consider disputes in relation to residential tenancies which fall within the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA). Section 77(1) of the RTA provides that the Tribunal has: ... subject to the Limitation Act 2010, jurisdiction to determine in accordance with this Act any dispute that— (a) exists between a landlord and a tenant or between a landlord and the guarantor of a tenant; and (b) relates to any tenancy to which this Act applies or to which this Act did apply at any material time.

The term ‘landlord’ is defined in section 2 of the RTA as meaning: landlord, in relation to any residential premises that are the subject of a tenancy agreement, means the grantor of a tenancy of the premises under the agreement;

And similarly, ‘tenant’ is defined as: tenant, in relation to any residential premises that are the subject of a tenancy agreement, means the grantee of a tenancy of the premises under the agreement;

The term ‘residential premises’ is defined in section 2 of the RTA as: residential premises means any premises used or intended for occupation by any person as a place of residence, whether or not the occupation or intended occupation for residential purposes is or would be unlawful.

The term ‘tenancy’ is defined in section 2 as: tenancy, in relation to any residential premises, means the right to occupy the premises (whether exclusively or otherwise) in consideration for rent; and includes any tenancy of residential premises implied or created by any enactment; and, where appropriate, also includes a former tenancy.

There is a statutory presumption in section 4 of the RTA that the RTA will apply to all residential tenancies, unless specifically excluded. That provision confirms that: This Act applies to every tenancy for residential purposes except as specifically provided.

Section 5 of the RTA sets out a range of situations when the tenancy will be ‘excluded’ from the RTA. Of relevance is subsection (1)(n), which confirms that the RTA will not apply: where the premises, not being a boarding house, continue to be used, during the tenancy, principally as a place of residence by the landlord or the owner of the premises or by any member of the landlord’s or owner’s family.

The parties entered into a ‘flat sharing’ agreement which specifically excludes the RTA. The respondent advised at the hearing that the respondent and his wife reside at the premises and the intention was for the applicant to reside with them. The respondent also confirmed that the premises is owned by the respondent.

This tenancy is an ‘excluded tenancy’ and the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to hear the applicant’s claim.

Reasons

The applicant has applied for refund of a bond paid to the respondent.

Does the Tribunal have jurisdiction to hear this claim?

This tenancy is an ‘excluded tenancy’ and the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to hear the applicant’s claim.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5245237 — Boarding House at 14 Seine Road, Forrest Hill, Auckland 0620

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5245237 — Boarding House at 14 Seine Road, Forrest Hill, Auckland 0620

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Does the Tribunal have jurisdiction to hear this claim?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Does the Tribunal have jurisdiction to hear this claim?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions