What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5341909 about?

The tribunal order states: The application by [The tenant/s] for a reduction in the term of her fixed

How much money was awarded in case 5341909?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5341909?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5341909?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12421293-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5341909 about?

The tribunal order states: The application by [The tenant/s] for a reduction in the term of her fixed

How much money was awarded in case 5341909?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5341909?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5341909?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12421293-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat Unit 5, 443 Madras Street, St Albans, Christchurch Tenancy Tribunal Case 5341909 — Tenancy dispute

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing, by telephone.

The tenant has applied for reduction of the fixed-term tenancy due to end on 13/3/2026.

Should the term of the tenancy be reduced?

The usual legal position with a fixed-term contract is that the term of the contract will be applied strictly, and it is only in limited circumstances that a court or tribunal will interfere with it. For residential tenancies, one of those circumstances is found in s 66 Residential Tenancies Act 1986, which allows for the reduction of fixed term tenancy agreements.

There is a high threshold to be met before the Tribunal will reduce the term. In particular the applicant will need to establish that: a. there has been a change in their circumstances, b. the change was unforeseen, c. the unforeseen change will result in severe hardship to the applicant if the tenancy is not reduced, d. the severe hardship the applicant will suffer if the term is not reduced exceeds the hardship the other party will suffer if the term is reduced.

Section 66(2) provides that, if the Tribunal reduces the term of the tenancy, it may order the applicant to pay reasonable compensation to the other party for any loss or damage which results from the reduction of the term.

The weighing of relative hardship is a question of fact to be assessed objectively in each case.

In Bond v Tang Invercargill TT09/583IN the Tribunal discussed that section 66 was used to seek a balance between the competing interests of applicant tenants, for whom significant obligations under fixed-term agreements can create hardship when circumstances unexpectedly turn against them and landlords who have financial expectations arising from the same bargain. Standard of proof

This is a civil jurisdiction which means when looking at the claim the standard of proof is on the balance of probabilities. Put simply this means the tenant must establish, with evidence, that her claim is more likely than not.

The Tribunal does not need to be completely certain. All evidence presented is considered and weighed to decide what is more likely.

Where there are serious allegations, or important issues at stake, as in this case, the Tribunal needs a level of supporting evidence benefitting the matters to be decided.

The onus is on the applicant, in this case the tenant, to provide the necessary evidence to support her claim. If she fails to do so then the application will be dismissed, whether it has merit or not.

Has there been an unforeseen change in the tenant's circumstances?

Unfortunate as it may be for the tenant, I find the evidence does not establish there has been an unforeseen change in her circumstances.

While I note the tenant’s evidence that she is stressed and doesn’t wish to live at the premises because of unexpectedly seeing a neighbour who caused her trauma twenty years ago, there is simply no objective evidence to support her claim.

The tenant suggested she had started taking medication again but confirmed she had not seen a medical practitioner or counsellor.

Nor is there any persuasive evidence that the neighbour recognised the tenant or that there had been any interaction between the tenant and the neighbour to raise concerns about the tenant’s safety and security at the premises.

I conclude that the tenant has not identified, to the necessary standard a change in her circumstances that would have been unforeseen.

Although the landlord did not want the term reduced, she has attempted to mitigate the loss of both parties by agreeing to the tenant assigning the tenancy and allowing her to find a new tenant.

As I have determined there has been no unforeseen change in the tenant’s circumstances, I do not need to consider the second part of the test; that is whether the severe hardship the tenant would suffer if the term of the tenancy is not reduced would be greater than the hardship the landlord would suffer if the term were reduced.

The claim by the tenant fails.

No filing fee is awarded because the tenant was unsuccess in the proceedings.

For the same reason suppression is not available to the tenant.

Order

The application by [The tenant/s] for a reduction in the term of her fixed term tenancy at Unit/Flat Unit 5, 443 Madras Street, St Albans, Christchurch 8014 is dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing, by telephone.
The tenant has applied for reduction of the fixed-term tenancy due to end on 13/3/2026.

Should the term of the tenancy be reduced?

The usual legal position with a fixed-term contract is that the term of the contract will be applied strictly, and it is only in limited circumstances that a court or tribunal will interfere with it. For residential tenancies, one of those circumstances is found in s 66 Residential Tenancies Act 1986, which allows for the reduction of fixed term tenancy agreements.
There is a high threshold to be met before the Tribunal will reduce the term. In particular the applicant will need to establish that: a. there has been a change in their circumstances, b. the change was unforeseen, c. the unforeseen change will result in severe hardship to the applicant if the tenancy is not reduced, d. the severe hardship the applicant will suffer if the term is not reduced exceeds the hardship the other party will suffer if the term is reduced.
Section 66(2) provides that, if the Tribunal reduces the term of the tenancy, it may order the applicant to pay reasonable compensation to the other party for any loss or damage which results from the reduction of the term.
The weighing of relative hardship is a question of fact to be assessed objectively in each case.
In Bond v Tang Invercargill TT09/583IN the Tribunal discussed that section 66 was used to seek a balance between the competing interests of applicant tenants, for whom significant obligations under fixed-term agreements can create hardship when circumstances unexpectedly turn against them and landlords who have financial expectations arising from the same bargain. Standard of proof
This is a civil jurisdiction which means when looking at the claim the standard of proof is on the balance of probabilities. Put simply this means the tenant must establish, with evidence, that her claim is more likely than not.
The Tribunal does not need to be completely certain. All evidence presented is considered and weighed to decide what is more likely.
Where there are serious allegations, or important issues at stake, as in this case, the Tribunal needs a level of supporting evidence benefitting the matters to be decided.
The onus is on the applicant, in this case the tenant, to provide the necessary evidence to support her claim. If she fails to do so then the application will be dismissed, whether it has merit or not.

Has there been an unforeseen change in the tenant's circumstances?

Unfortunate as it may be for the tenant, I find the evidence does not establish there has been an unforeseen change in her circumstances.
While I note the tenant’s evidence that she is stressed and doesn’t wish to live at the premises because of unexpectedly seeing a neighbour who caused her trauma twenty years ago, there is simply no objective evidence to support her claim.
The tenant suggested she had started taking medication again but confirmed she had not seen a medical practitioner or counsellor.
Nor is there any persuasive evidence that the neighbour recognised the tenant or that there had been any interaction between the tenant and the neighbour to raise concerns about the tenant’s safety and security at the premises.
I conclude that the tenant has not identified, to the necessary standard a change in her circumstances that would have been unforeseen.
Although the landlord did not want the term reduced, she has attempted to mitigate the loss of both parties by agreeing to the tenant assigning the tenancy and allowing her to find a new tenant.
As I have determined there has been no unforeseen change in the tenant’s circumstances, I do not need to consider the second part of the test; that is whether the severe hardship the tenant would suffer if the term of the tenancy is not reduced would be greater than the hardship the landlord would suffer if the term were reduced.
The claim by the tenant fails.
No filing fee is awarded because the tenant was unsuccess in the proceedings.
For the same reason suppression is not available to the tenant.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5341909 — Tenancy dispute at Unit/Flat Unit 5, 443 Madras Street, St Albans, Christchurch

At a glance

Claims & awards

Tenancy Tribunal case 5341909 — Tenancy dispute at Unit/Flat Unit 5, 443 Madras Street, St Albans, Christchurch

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Should the term of the tenancy be reduced?

Has there been an unforeseen change in the tenant's circumstances?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Order

Reasons

Should the term of the tenancy be reduced?

Has there been an unforeseen change in the tenant's circumstances?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Property management

Frequently asked questions