Tenantcheck Insights · Case study
Tenancy Tribunal case 5421920 — Tenancy dispute
Decided 2 Mar 2026 · Published 2 Mar 2026 · Application 5421920
- Property damage
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
R Morgan
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
- An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant name and identifying details.
- The application is dismissed.
Reasons
- Both parties attended the hearing.
- The landlord has applied for a possession order. However, it is has not provided a valid notice to terminate the tenancy. The application is dismissed.
- On 17 November 2025, the landlord provided a 42 Day notice to end the tenancy on the basis that the landlord requires the property for their own use. The notice did not specify how the landlord intended to use the premises. The notice referred to s51(2)(f) Residential Tenancies Act.
- At the start of the hearing the landlord said that it wanted to renovate the premises for sale. That is consistent with the former s51(2)(f) RTA.
- Section 51(2)(f) RTA provided that a landlord may give a 90 day notice to end a tenancy where extensive alterations, refurbishment, repairs, or redevelopment of the premises are to be carried out by the landlord or owner, and— (i)it would not be reasonably practicable for the tenant to remain in occupation while the work is undertaken; and (ii)the work is to begin, or material steps towards it are to be taken, within 90 days after the termination date.
- Taking a material step meant applying for regulatory consent, seeking engineering or other professional advice or taking any other significant step.
- Section 51(2)(f) was repealed by the Residential Tenancies Amendment Act 2024 1 and was not in force when the landlord gave the notice to terminate.
- Even if section 51(2)(f) was in force in November 2025, the notice was defective because the landlord only gave 42 days’ notice, not the 90 days’ notice required by that section.
- During the hearing, I explained my concerns to the landlord’s representative. He then said that he might move into the premises. The relevant time for determining the landlord’s intention is when the notice is given.
- At the time this notice was given, the objective was not to move into the premises. Further, the landlord is a company. Section 51(2)(a) provides that a landlord may terminate a periodic tenancy by giving at least 42 days’ notice if the owner of the premises requires the premises, within 90 days after the termination date, as the principal place of residence for at least 90 days for the owner or a member of the owner’s family. A company is separate legal entity and does not have a family.
- The notice to terminate the tenancy dated 17 November 2025 is invalid. The application for a possession order is dismissed.
- As the tenants were the successful party, I have suppressed their details.