What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5269044 about?

The tribunal order states: In accordance with section 92A of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986, the

How much money was awarded in case 5269044?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5269044?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5269044?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12540644-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5269044 about?

The tribunal order states: In accordance with section 92A of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986, the

How much money was awarded in case 5269044?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5269044?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5269044?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12540644-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

39 Waihou Crescent, Albany Heights, Auckland 0632 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5269044 — Tenancy dispute

Tenantcheck Insights

Reasons

Background

This matter concerns an application filed by the tenants, Ms Liu and Mr Wu, against the landlord, Investments Today Limited.

Ms Ye appeared as the agent for the landlord.

Ms Yu attended the hearing as the Mandarin interpreter. The law

Section 92A of the RTA provides: The Tribunal may strike out, in whole or in part, a proceeding if satisfied that it— (a) discloses no reasonable cause of action; or (b) is likely to cause prejudice or delay; or (c) is frivolous or vexatious; or (d) is otherwise an abuse of process.

In O’Neill v New Zealand Law Society and others CA170/2021 [2022] NZCA 500, the Court of Appeal held that when considering an application to strike out, held that: ... access to justice is an important human right. For that reason, a court will not lightly strike out a viable proceeding.... Findings of facts and conclusion

The landlord, Investments Today Limited, was placed into liquidation on 30 July 2025. This information remains correct as of the date of this decision, according to the Companies Register.

Section 248 of the Companies Act 1993 provides that no legal proceedings may be commenced or continued against a company in liquidation unless the liquidator consents or the High Court orders otherwise.

Consequently, the tenants’ application against the landlord is not a viable proceeding and discloses no reasonable cause of action under section 92A(a) of the RTA.

Accordingly, the tenants’ application against the landlord, Investments Today Limited, is struck out in accordance with section 92A of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

Can the tenants file an application against the agent?

The tenants allege that the landlord breached sections 47(2) and 60AA of the RTA and seek compensation under several headings.

However, as the current application is struck out under section 92A, any claims relating to these alleged breaches are irrelevant for the purpose of today’s hearing.

During the hearing, I encouraged the agent, Ms Ye, to seek independent legal advice, as she may still be personally liable. It is a matter for her to decide what steps she wishes to take following this decision.

I also encouraged the tenants to obtain independent legal advice to ensure they understand their rights and obligations.

For completeness, I make no finding as to whether Ms Ye is personally liable in her capacity as the landlord’s agent.

Reasons

Background

This matter concerns an application filed by the tenants, Ms Liu and Mr Wu, against the landlord, Investments Today Limited.

Ms Ye appeared as the agent for the landlord.

Ms Yu attended the hearing as the Mandarin interpreter. The law

The landlord, Investments Today Limited, was placed into liquidation on 30 July 2025. This information remains correct as of the date of this decision, according to the Companies Register.

Consequently, the tenants’ application against the landlord is not a viable proceeding and discloses no reasonable cause of action under section 92A(a) of the RTA.

Accordingly, the tenants’ application against the landlord, Investments Today Limited, is struck out in accordance with section 92A of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

Can the tenants file an application against the agent?

The tenants allege that the landlord breached sections 47(2) and 60AA of the RTA and seek compensation under several headings.

However, as the current application is struck out under section 92A, any claims relating to these alleged breaches are irrelevant for the purpose of today’s hearing.

I also encouraged the tenants to obtain independent legal advice to ensure they understand their rights and obligations.

For completeness, I make no finding as to whether Ms Ye is personally liable in her capacity as the landlord’s agent.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5269044 — Tenancy dispute at 39 Waihou Crescent, Albany Heights, Auckland 0632

At a glance

Claims & awards

Tenancy Tribunal case 5269044 — Tenancy dispute at 39 Waihou Crescent, Albany Heights, Auckland 0632

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Can the tenants file an application against the agent?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Order

Reasons

Can the tenants file an application against the agent?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Property management

Frequently asked questions