Tenantcheck Insights · Case study
Tenancy Tribunal case 5321384 — Tenancy dispute
Decided 4 Mar 2026 · Published 4 Mar 2026 · Application 5321384
Party names are redacted in the official published order. This page summarises the dispute only — not individual identities.
At a glance
Key facts from the published tribunal order.
Adjudicator
B Carter
Claims & awards
What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.
No individual claim amounts were reconciled for this order. View the official Ministry of Justice PDF for full detail.
Order
- The names and identifying details of the Landlord and the second and third named Tenants are suppressed.
- The application is dismissed.
Reasons
- The Tenants, who made this application, did not attend the hearing at the scheduled time, request an adjournment, or otherwise notify the Tribunal that she could not attend the hearing. The Landlord did attend.
- I delayed publishing this order until the day after the hearing to enable the Tenants to contact the Tribunal if there was a good reason for their non- attendance. The Tenants have not contacted the Tribunal.
- I therefore dismiss the claim, on the grounds that the Tenants did not appear at the hearing. A notice of hearing was sent to the addresses for service provided by the Tenants. They did not attend. The appropriate outcome is to dismiss the claim, as allowed by 92(1) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
- The Landlord has been successful. He is entitled to name suppression. I also suppress the names and identifying details of the second and third named Tenants. The Landlord tells me that they had already moved out of the premises when the claim was filed, and he doubts whether they were even aware that this claim was being brought on their behalf. Given the real risk that they were unwitting participants, I suppress their names and identifying details.