How much money was awarded in case 5381601?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5381601?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5381601?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12770535-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 5381601?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5381601?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5381601?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12770535-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5381601 — Tenancy dispute

Q: What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5381601 about?

The tribunal order states: An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the applicant’s name and identifying details.
[The landlord/s] is granted possession of the premises at [Tenancy address suppressed] immediately. This order can be enforced with immediate effect.
Todd Jason Mesarich must pay [The landlord/s] $28.00 to reimburse the filing fee immediately.

Reasons

Only the applicant attended the hearing represented by its director via video link. Mr Mesarich did not attend the video hearing via the available link and did not provide a telephone number to the Tribunal so he could be telephoned. However, I am satisfied he has been served and so the hearing proceeded in his absence.
The applicant has applied under s 65 Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”) for a possession order for the property. Facts
I heard how the applicant purchased 19 Sherwood Avenue, Te Atatu South, Auckland 0610 (the “premises”) in September 2025 from the respondent and his brothers. I heard how the sale was a court ordered sale.
I heard how the applicant has purchased the premises, but the respondent remains living there with his dog. I heard how the applicant had attempted to serve a trespass notice and how the police had told the applicant that it needs to obtain an appropriate order and involve the bailiff. I heard from the applicant that the respondent should have left the premises when the applicant purchased it, but he has not. Law
Section 65 RTA provides that where, on the application of any person entitled to possession of any residential premises, the Tribunal is satisfied that any other person is in possession of the premises as a squatter or trespasser, or otherwise than pursuant to any right of occupation granted to that person by any person having lawful authority to grant that right to that other person, the Tribunal shall make a possession order granting possession of the premises to the applicant.
Section 65 RTA was considered by the High Court in Sergeant v Nigro and Tapsell [2019] NZHC 328. The court held that there are three conditions which must be met before an order can be made: a. The premises must be residential premises. b. The applicant is entitled to possession. c. Another person or persons are in possession as squatters, trespassers or otherwise than pursuant to any right of occupation granted by a person having lawful authority to do so.
If these three elements are established then the Tribunal must make a possession order.
If the applicant can prove (a) and (b) then the onus will move to the respondent to prove on the balance of probabilities that they have a right of occupation granted by any person with lawful authority to grant it and that the right has not been terminated. Analysis
I heard how the premises are a house and the respondent remains living there. The premises are clearly residential.
The applicant provided documentary evidence to support the position that it purchased the premises on 15 September 2025. The applicant provided a copy of the Record of Title confirming it is the registered proprietor.
The applicant confirmed that it had not granted any right of occupation to the respondent. He has simply continued to live at the premises after the sale.
I find that the applicant, as legal owner, is entitled to possession of the premises. The current occupant has no lawful right to occupy the premises and so all elements of section 65 RTA have been satisfied, the Tribunal must make the possession order sought, and a possession order is granted. Enforcement
It is reasonable to order that the landlord may enforce the order granting possession with immediate effect.
Section 138 of the District Court Act 2016 holds that normally an order cannot be enforced until 48 hours have expired, unless a “Judge grants leave”. However, section 106(2) of the RTA which relates to enforcement of possession orders, confirms that reference to a ‘Judge’ in section 138(1) applies as if it were reference to a Tenancy Adjudicator.
This is a case where it is appropriate that leave be granted for an immediate enforcement of the possession order. Filing fee and name suppression
Because the applicant has succeeded with the claim I reimburse the filing fee.
The applicant seeks suppression of its identifying details, and I award this as the applicant has been wholly successful (see s 95A RTA). I see no reason to supress the respondent’s details.

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the applicant’s name and identifying details.

[The landlord/s] is granted possession of the premises at [Tenancy address suppressed] immediately. This order can be enforced with immediate effect.

Todd Jason Mesarich must pay [The landlord/s] $28.00 to reimburse the filing fee immediately.

Reasons

Only the applicant attended the hearing represented by its director via video link. Mr Mesarich did not attend the video hearing via the available link and did not provide a telephone number to the Tribunal so he could be telephoned. However, I am satisfied he has been served and so the hearing proceeded in his absence.

The applicant has applied under s 65 Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”) for a possession order for the property. Facts

I heard how the applicant purchased 19 Sherwood Avenue, Te Atatu South, Auckland 0610 (the “premises”) in September 2025 from the respondent and his brothers. I heard how the sale was a court ordered sale.

I heard how the applicant has purchased the premises, but the respondent remains living there with his dog. I heard how the applicant had attempted to serve a trespass notice and how the police had told the applicant that it needs to obtain an appropriate order and involve the bailiff. I heard from the applicant that the respondent should have left the premises when the applicant purchased it, but he has not. Law

Section 65 RTA provides that where, on the application of any person entitled to possession of any residential premises, the Tribunal is satisfied that any other person is in possession of the premises as a squatter or trespasser, or otherwise than pursuant to any right of occupation granted to that person by any person having lawful authority to grant that right to that other person, the Tribunal shall make a possession order granting possession of the premises to the applicant.

Section 65 RTA was considered by the High Court in Sergeant v Nigro and Tapsell [2019] NZHC 328. The court held that there are three conditions which must be met before an order can be made: a. The premises must be residential premises. b. The applicant is entitled to possession. c. Another person or persons are in possession as squatters, trespassers or otherwise than pursuant to any right of occupation granted by a person having lawful authority to do so.

If these three elements are established then the Tribunal must make a possession order.

If the applicant can prove (a) and (b) then the onus will move to the respondent to prove on the balance of probabilities that they have a right of occupation granted by any person with lawful authority to grant it and that the right has not been terminated. Analysis

I heard how the premises are a house and the respondent remains living there. The premises are clearly residential.

The applicant provided documentary evidence to support the position that it purchased the premises on 15 September 2025. The applicant provided a copy of the Record of Title confirming it is the registered proprietor.

The applicant confirmed that it had not granted any right of occupation to the respondent. He has simply continued to live at the premises after the sale.

I find that the applicant, as legal owner, is entitled to possession of the premises. The current occupant has no lawful right to occupy the premises and so all elements of section 65 RTA have been satisfied, the Tribunal must make the possession order sought, and a possession order is granted. Enforcement

It is reasonable to order that the landlord may enforce the order granting possession with immediate effect.

Section 138 of the District Court Act 2016 holds that normally an order cannot be enforced until 48 hours have expired, unless a “Judge grants leave”. However, section 106(2) of the RTA which relates to enforcement of possession orders, confirms that reference to a ‘Judge’ in section 138(1) applies as if it were reference to a Tenancy Adjudicator.

This is a case where it is appropriate that leave be granted for an immediate enforcement of the possession order. Filing fee and name suppression

Because the applicant has succeeded with the claim I reimburse the filing fee.

The applicant seeks suppression of its identifying details, and I award this as the applicant has been wholly successful (see s 95A RTA). I see no reason to supress the respondent’s details.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5381601 — Tenancy dispute

At a glance

Claims & awards

Tenancy Tribunal case 5381601 — Tenancy dispute

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Frequently asked questions

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Frequently asked questions