What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5375722 about?

The tribunal order states: The Tribunal orders interim suppression of the Tenants and Landlord’s name and

How much money was awarded in case 5375722?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5375722?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages. Related themes: Boarding House.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5375722?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12872618-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5375722 about?

The tribunal order states: The Tribunal orders interim suppression of the Tenants and Landlord’s name and

How much money was awarded in case 5375722?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5375722?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages. Related themes: Boarding House.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5375722?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12872618-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5375722 — Exemplary damages

Order

The Tribunal orders interim suppression of the Tenants and Landlord’s name and identifying details.
The Tenants’ claim that the Landlord’s notice to end the tenancy was retaliatory is dismissed.
This matter is to be set down for a further hearing after 5 February 2025.

Reasons

This was s a 12-month fixed term tenancy that commenced on 16 November 2024. The 12-month fixed term was due to expire on 14 November 2025. On 24 October 2025, the Landlord sent a notice to the Tenants advising them that the tenancy would not continue beyond the expiry of the fixed term and asking the Tenants to vacate the premises on that date.
The Tenants have now filed a claim alleging multiple breaches of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 by the Landlord, for which the Tenant seeks a full rent refund, compensation and exemplary damages.
This decision is not the final decision of the Tribunal. Instead, I determine only the Tenants’ claim that the Landlord’s notice to end the tenancy was retaliatory. All other claims will then be considered and determined after a further hearing. The alleged retaliatory notice
On 3 August 2025, the Landlord provided a letter to the Tenants stating: I confirm that the property located at 1/6 Bowling Ave, Epsom, Auckland will remain available for the current tenants to rent in 2026 and for the foreseeable future. There are no current plans to sell, move in, or otherwise terminate the tenancy. It is my intention to continue this rental arrangement without disruption, and I understand that the stability of this tenancy supports Rosalie’s ongoing enrolment at Epsom Girls Grammar School.
That letter was to be supplied to Epsom Girls Grammar as proof that the Tenants’ daughter was living, and would continue to live, in that school’s zone for enrolment.
On 24 October 2025, the Landlord sent an email to the Tenants advising them that the fixed term tenancy would end on 14 November 2025, and they were required to vacate the premises on or before that date. No reasons were given in that email. During the hearing, the Landlord says that he decided that he wanted to use the premises as an Air BNB.
The Tenants say that the Landlord’s notice on 24 October 2025 was sent in retaliation to the Tenants raising concerns about the Landlord using unsafe and unregistered contractors to perform electrical work at the premises on 21 October 2025. They say that, on the basis of the Landlord’s letter of 3 August, they had expected the tenancy to continue beyond the fixed term. They therefore believe that the notice was given in retaliation for the Tenants raising concerns about the electrical contractors used by the Landlord. The relevant law
Under section 54(1) of the Residential Tenancies Act, the Tribunal can declare a notice to be retaliatory where: (a)it is a notice to terminate a tenancy; and (b)that notice complies with the requirements in section 51 of the Residential Tenancies Act (or section 66U of the Act for boarding house arrangements). The Tribunal has no power to declare any other notice to end a tenancy as being retaliatory.
The Landlord’s notice to end the tenancy was given under section 60A(2)(c) of the Residential Tenancies Act, which enables a party to a fixed term tenancy to give the other party written notice of their intention not to continue with the tenancy. The issues
The issues I need to determine are whether a notice given under section 60A(2)(c) of the Residential Tenancies Act is: (a)a notice to terminate a tenancy; and (b)a notice that complies with section 51 of the Residential Tenancies Act. My assessment
I understood the Tenants to submit that I should interpret the relevant provisions, particularly sections 51 and 54, broadly and consistent with the protective intention of the Residential Tenancies Act to capture all notices that end a residential tenancy, including notices to end a fixed term tenancy issued under section 60A(2)(c).
Even on a broad and purposive interpretation of the provisions, I cannot come to that conclusion for two reasons. First, the Landlord’s notice was not a notice to terminate a tenancy. Second, the notice did not comply, and was not required to comply, with the requirements in section 51 of the Residential Tenancies Act because that section applies only to notices to terminate a periodic tenancy. The notice was not a notice to terminate a tenancy
Section 50 of the Residential Tenancies Act sets out all the circumstances in which a residential tenancy (whether fixed or periodic) can be terminated under the Act. A residential tenancy cannot be terminated in any way other than the circumstances set out in section 50.
Under section 50(1)(c), only periodic tenancies are terminated by notice under section 51 of the Act. Fixed term tenancies can be terminated in many other ways – for example, upon the expiry of the term of the tenancy or, if any of sections 55AA, 56A(1), 58(1)(d), (da), 58A, 59, 59A, or 59B apply. But a fixed term tenancy cannot be terminated by notice under section 60A(2) or section 51.
It follows that a notice issued under section 60A(2)(c) is not a notice to terminate a tenancy. It is a notice to end the tenancy at the expiry of fixed term issued under section 60A(2)(c).
In reaching this conclusion, I am also influenced by the language of section 60A(2)(c). Section 60A(2)(c) refers to a notice of an intention not to continue with the tenancy – not to a notice to terminate a tenancy. In that regard, I note that section 60A(2)(d) refers to notices that terminate a fixed term tenancy. If Parliament intended a notice under section 60A(2)(c) to be a notice of termination, it would have used that language. The notice did not comply with section 51 of the Act
Even if I am wrong on this point, and the Landlord’s notice was a notice to terminate the tenancy, section 51 would not apply. That is because section 51 does not apply to notices to end a fixed term tenancy. It applies only to the termination of periodic tenancies. That conclusion is supported by the language of section 50 of the Act. As discussed above, section 50 is clear that only periodic tenancies are terminated under section 51.
The language of section 51 also supports this conclusion. Section 51(1), (2) and (2A) of the Residential Tenancies Act sets rules for termination of a periodic tenancy by notice: (a)under section 51(1), a Landlord may terminate a periodic tenancy with at least 90 days’ notice; (b)under section 51(2), a Landlord may terminate a periodic tenancy with at least 42 days’ notice for the reasons set out in that subsection; and (c)under section 51(2A) a tenant may terminate a periodic tenancy for any reason by giving at least 21 days’ notice.
Those provisions relate only to periodic tenancies and do not apply to fixed term tenancies.
Subsections 51(3) to (10) do refer more generally to notices to terminate a tenancy and notices of termination, without specific reference to periodic tenancies. But that more general language does not mean that subsections 51(3) to (10) also apply to notices that end a fixed term tenancy.
In my view, the most logical way to interpret subsections 51(3) to (10) of the Residential Tenancies Act is to see those provisions as setting the rules that apply to notices to terminate a periodic tenancy under subsections 51(1), (2) and (2A) of the Act. That conclusion is supported by references in subsections 51(3) to (10) that can only apply to periodic tenancies. For example: (a)Section 51(3)(ca) can only logically apply to notices given under section 51(2), where a landlord must have reasons for ending a periodic tenancy with less than 90 days’ notice. (b)Sections 51(7) and (9) expressly apply only to notices issued under 51(1), (2) and (2A); and (c)Section 51(10) expressly applies only to notices issued under section 51(2).
I therefore find that section 51 applies only to the termination of a periodic tenancy. In light of the explicit references to periodic tenancies only in sections 51(1), (2) and (2A) and the references in the later subsections that can relate only to notices to terminate a periodic tenancy, even applying a broad and purposive interpretation, I cannot conclude that section 51 is intended to apply more broadly to any other notice that might end a fixed term tenancy. Outcome
The Landlord’s notice dated 24 October 2025 was not a retaliatory notice for the purposes of the Residential Tenancies Act. It was not a notice to terminate the tenancy, and it did not, and was not required to, comply with section 51 of the Act.
I also find that the notice was valid. The Residential Tenancies Act requires that notice to be given no sooner than 90 days and no later than 21 days before the date of the end of the fixed term. 1 The notice was given within the required period. It was given on the 21 st day before the end of the fixed term.
The Tenants’ claim alleging that the notice was retaliatory is therefore dismissed. Interim name suppression
This decision determines only a small part of the Tenants’ claims. There are many other claims that will need to be determined at a later date. I therefore order interim name suppression for both parties. That suppression will expire at the next hearing.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5375722 — Exemplary damages

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5375722 — Exemplary damages

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions