How much money was awarded in case 5437228?

Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $5,528.57 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $196.37 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5437228?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5437228?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13511614-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 5437228?

Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $5,528.57 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $196.37 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5437228?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5437228?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13511614-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5437228 — Rent arrears

Q: What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5437228 about?

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

Tenantcheck Insights

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5437228 — net $3,312.94 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears (to 2 February 2026	$5,528.57	Rent arrears (to 2 February 2026
Water rates ( 8 Jul – 9 Oct 2025	$196.37	Water rates ( 8 Jul – 9 Oct 2025
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$3,312.94
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$3,312.94

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

This order replaces the earlier mediated Order made on 31 October 2025 under application number 5367111. Only the costs ordered under this order may be enforced.

Bella Godsmark must pay [The landlord/s] $3,312.94 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,440.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.

Reasons

On 2 February 2026, the landlord filed an application seeking rent arrears, water rates, compensation, refund of bond and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

The hearing proceeded by way of video conference. [Property Manager], Team Leader, and [Property Manager], Property Manager, appeared for the landlord. The tenant failed to appear. The Tribunal was satisfied the tenant was properly served with the notice of hearing and the case proceeded in their absence.

How much is owed for rent ?

The tenancy ended on 2 February 2026. The landlord provided up-to-date rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy totalled $5,528.57. The amount claimed is proved.

Hose much is owed in water rates?

The landlord seeks water rates totalling $382.13.

A water rates bill for the period 8 July to 9 October 2025 totalling $ 196.37 for water use only was provided. A tenant invoice was also provided. The amount claimed is proved.

The landlord seeks water rates for the period 10 October 2025 to 2 February 2026. A copy of a tenant invoice in the amount of $185.76 was provided. The Tribunal was not provided with a copy of the water rates bill for the period, and/or a photographs showing the water meter at the end of the tenancy with calculation proving the amount claimed. Based on the available evidence, the Tribunal cannot be satisfied the landlord has proved the amount claimed and this portion of the claim is dismissed. Are the tenant’s liable to pay compensation for a previous Tribunal filing fee?

The landlord seeks compensation of $28.00 after filing earlier proceedings with the Tribunal under application number 5367111. The landlord said that the filing fee was not ordered under that claim.

The Tribunal declines to award cost in respect of an earlier filing fee. The costs should have been claimed at that hearing and the principle of res judicata applies.

Res judicata has been defined by Spencer Bower, Turner and Handley in Res Judicata (3rd ed, 1996, Butterworths) as follows: In English law a res judicata is a decision pronounced by a judicial tribunal having jurisdiction over the case and the parties which disposes once and for all of the matters decided, so that except on appeal, they cannot afterwards be relitigated between the same parties or their privies.

The authors of LexisNexis’ District Court Practise (Civil) said at DCR209.8 stated that “It is an abuse of process where a matter has already been litigated to conclusion, and a disgruntled party to that litigation seeks to resurrect it in some other form”.

It is not at all uncommon that a party who has been unsuccessful in proceedings in a court or Tribunal, reflects on matters and considers there are other arguments they could have made, or further evidence they could have produced. But that is not enough. A noted by Justice Fogarty in Shepherd v Disputes Tribunal [2004] NZAR 19 at paras [35] – [36]:

Whenever a party against whom a judgment has been made has failed to raise some question he or she could have raised, the judgment includes a decision on the omitted question. This is because the law imposes a positive obligation on litigants to bring forward their whole case. The law will not hear a litigant to argue later that they have not argued their case carefully or inadvertently or by accident omitted part of their case. This has been the law for a considerable period of time and dates back to the leading case of Henderson (1843) 3 Hare 100 at 114-115.

This may seem hard on litigants. But the reason for the law taking this approach is that there is a greater public interest in decisions being final. If that were not the case, then litigation could go on and on and on. See Hoystead v Federal Taxation Commissioner [1926] AC 155, 165-166 (PC).

In this case the landlords should have claimed costs at the hearing of the previous matter but failed to do so. The claim is dismissed. Other matters

This order replaces the earlier mediated Order made on 31 October 2025 under application number 5367111. Only the costs ordered under this order may be enforced.

Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

The landlord has applied for name suppression. Section 95A(1) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 provided that the Tribunal must, on application of a party that has been wholly or substantially successful in proceedings, order that party’s name and identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the party’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.

The landlord has substantially succeeded with the claim and is therefore granted name suppression.

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5437228 — net $3,312.94 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears (to 2 February 2026	$5,528.57	Rent arrears (to 2 February 2026
Water rates ( 8 Jul – 9 Oct 2025	$196.37	Water rates ( 8 Jul – 9 Oct 2025
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$3,312.94
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$3,312.94

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

This order replaces the earlier mediated Order made on 31 October 2025 under application number 5367111. Only the costs ordered under this order may be enforced.

Bella Godsmark must pay [The landlord/s] $3,312.94 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,440.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.

Reasons

On 2 February 2026, the landlord filed an application seeking rent arrears, water rates, compensation, refund of bond and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent ?

The tenancy ended on 2 February 2026. The landlord provided up-to-date rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy totalled $5,528.57. The amount claimed is proved.

Hose much is owed in water rates?

The landlord seeks water rates totalling $382.13.

A water rates bill for the period 8 July to 9 October 2025 totalling $ 196.37 for water use only was provided. A tenant invoice was also provided. The amount claimed is proved.

The landlord seeks compensation of $28.00 after filing earlier proceedings with the Tribunal under application number 5367111. The landlord said that the filing fee was not ordered under that claim.

The Tribunal declines to award cost in respect of an earlier filing fee. The costs should have been claimed at that hearing and the principle of res judicata applies.

In this case the landlords should have claimed costs at the hearing of the previous matter but failed to do so. The claim is dismissed. Other matters

This order replaces the earlier mediated Order made on 31 October 2025 under application number 5367111. Only the costs ordered under this order may be enforced.

Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

The landlord has substantially succeeded with the claim and is therefore granted name suppression.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5437228 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Award balance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5437228 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent ?

Hose much is owed in water rates?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent ?

Hose much is owed in water rates?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions