What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5265439 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 5265439?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5265439?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5265439?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12035938-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5265439 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 5265439?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5265439?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5265439?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12035938-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5265439 — Tenancy dispute

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant’s and Landlord’s name and identifying details.
The respective applications of both tenant and landlord are dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the remote hearing on 26 June 2025.
The tenant seeks compensation for breach of a tenancy agreement. The landlord has filed a cross application seeking compensation for costs and expenses incurred in dealing with this matter, including attending the hearing. I propose referring to the parties as landlord and tenant for the sake of brevity.
The background facts are not greatly in dispute. A timeline is as follows;
Towards the end of April 2025, the tenant was seeking accommodation. He saw that the property at [tenancy address suppressed] (“the premises”) was advertised for rent. The advertisement confirmed that the weekly rental would be $350.00 per week.
The tenant attended an open home at the premises on 30 April 2025. The tenant spoke to both the owners and the property manager at the open home. The tenant expressed an interest in renting the premises. 6By email dated 30 April 2025 at 1.02 pm, the landlord said to the tenant ; “Was great to meet you this morning. I have completed all of my checks and spoken to the owners and they are happy to offer their cottage to you to rent. Please let me know if you accept. If you do accept them we can all work together to get the best move in date for all parties, as discussed the owners want to do a few maintenance jobs there. I would also require an emergency contact person for you:
Name of person.
Your relationship to you
Contact phone number
Address.
And if you prefer a fixed term contract or a periodic one. Look forward to hearing from you” (sic)
The tenant responded to the landlord’s email almost immediately. He said “ Hi [Landlord], yes I will absolutely accept. Do you need me to pop in to see you? Happy to move in when it works for the owners.” 8On 6 May 2025 at 12.02 pm, the property manager told the tenant that she had spoken with the owners. They had asked if Saturday 10 May 2025 suited the tenant for the key hand over and if the tenant would be prepared to mow the lawns on one occasion in return for a free day’s rent. The landlord said, “Let me know if this works so that I can go ahead and create your tenancy agreement”.
On 6 May 2025 at 12.32 pm, the property manager sent an e-mail to the tenant recording that “I have sent a copy of your tenancy agreement to this e- mail address, this will allow you to sign it on-line. Just ensure that the pre move in costs are all paid into head office before this weekend otherwise I can't hand the keys over.”
A standard form residential tenancy agreement was provided online to the tenant. The information contained with that tenancy agreement includes the following; Hi, You have made it to the final stage for the tenancy at [tenancy address suppressed] and the tenancy agreement is ready for you to sign and return it! Log in at [web address] and click on Agreements tab. If you cannot sign this agreement electronically, please contact the property manager to ask for a PDF to print & manually. After we have received the signed tenancy agreement (which is your offer to rent) back from you, we will send it to the landlord for acceptance. The tenancy cannot commence until all parties have signed the tenancy agreement, including the property manager. If the landlord accepts your offer, we will sign the tenancy agreement and communicate this with you, which will then mean the tenancy is official.”
The tenant signed the online agreement and returned it to the landlord.
At 4.53pm on 6 May 2025, the landlord informed the tenant that “due to a change in circumstances the owners cannot proceed with your application and allow you to move into [tenancy address suppressed].”
Both parties provided evidence of the reasons for the landlord failing to sign the tenancy agreement. As the reasons provided do not appear to breach the discrimination provisions in s.12 RTA, the reasons in themselves are not relevant to the Tribunal’s inquiry.
The tenant says that there was a completed tenancy agreement between the parties and that the agreement was formed by the email correspondence between the parties.
The landlord says that there was no completed tenancy agreement, as the tenancy agreement provided online to the tenant was never signed and accepted by the landlord.
For an agreement to exist, there must be an agreement between the parties on terms that are complete and certain. The parties must intend to create legal relations. Where these requirements do not exist, there is no contract. The court generally focuses not on the subjective intention of the parties, but rather on their objective intention. On how their intention is conveyed, by what they have said, written or done.
Agreement is usually found in the process of offer and acceptance, whereby one person makes an offer to another, who in turn accepts the offer.
It is a requirement of contract formation that there is agreement on every term that is essential to the contract.
The question for the Tribunal to consider is whether the email correspondence between the parties discloses an agreement under which the parties intended to be bound.
The leading case in determining whether a preliminary agreement is a binding contract is the decision of the Court of Appeal in Electricity Corporation of New Zealand Limited v Fletcher Challenge Energy Limited [2002]2 NZLR 433. The Court held that the prerequisites to formation of a contract were; “(a) an intention to be immediately bound (at the point when the bargain is said to have been agreed);and (b) an agreement, express or found by implication, or the means of achieving an agreement (eg an arbitration clause), on every term which: (i) was legally essential to the formation of such a bargain; or (ii) was regarded by the parties themselves as essential to their particular bargain.”
The requirement of an intention to be immediately bound is to be determined objectively. The key question is whether the parties intended that agreement to be binding. The intention to be bound corresponds with the willingness to contract and the unqualified assent that are inherent in an offer and acceptance respectively. In determining whether there was an intention to be bound, the Tribunal can take into account the agreement itself, as well as the context in which it was made.
Any apparently missing or unsettled term can indicate that the parties are not yet intending to be bound.
The evidence in this matter makes it clear that the landlord did not intend to be bound until the execution of a formal tenancy agreement. That proposition is supported by the landlord’s communication that an online agreement would be provided to the tenant and the information contained with the online agreement, that it would not be complete until it was signed by the landlord.
I consider the initial uncertainty as to the commencement date of the tenancy and the information sought from the tenant by the landlord prior to the preparation of the online agreement, to be significant in considering objectively what the landlord thought at the time of the initial discussion with the tenant.
The following evidence is relevant in considering the tenant’s intention.
The tenant did not raise any concerns when he was informed by the landlord that a tenancy agreement would be provided online for his execution. No concerns were raised by the tenant when the online information provided made it clear that his signing of the agreement would be his “offer to rent” and that the matter would only be concluded once the landlord had signed the agreement. Both of those occasions were opportunities for the tenant to raise any concerns that he may have had about what he considered to be a completed agreement. I make a factual inference on the evidence that neither party expected to be bound by the preliminary email correspondence.
The burden of proof in the tenant’s application is on the tenant. The Tribunal uses the civil standard of the balance of probabilities. Is something more likely than not? For the reasons set out above, I do not consider that the tenant has proven his claim to the required standard. The tenant’s application is dismissed.
The landlord seeks compensation.
The Tribunal has jurisdiction to consider claims between prospective landlords and tenants.
The landlord seeks compensation for costs incurred in completing background and credit checks, reference screening time, dealing with Tenancy Services and the parties with regards to this application and appearing at the hearing.
Can compensation be ordered where the Tribunal has found that no tenancy existed? Having found that not tenancy agreement existed, I can see no legal basis for the landlord’s claims. The claims are dismissed.
Both parties applied for name suppression. Both parties have achieved a degree of success in defeating the claim of the other. In those circumstances, I consider that each of the parties have been substantially successful in this hearing and suppression of both the tenant’s and landlord’s names and details is ordered. I make no order for reimbursement of the filing fee of either party.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5265439 — Tenancy dispute

At a glance

Claims & awards

Tenancy Tribunal case 5265439 — Tenancy dispute

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Frequently asked questions

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Frequently asked questions