Tenantcheck Insights · Case study
Tenancy Tribunal case 5453389 — Tenancy dispute
Decided 7 May 2026 · Published 7 May 2026 · Application 5453389
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
M Kemp
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
- The Tribunal orders suppression of the tenant’s name and identifying details.
- The landlord’s application is dismissed.
Reasons
- Previously Mr Lane of The Rent Shop and [The tenant/s] attended a hearing which took place remotely.
- In its application the landlord seeks a possession order following a 90 day notice to terminate the tenancy. The landlord alternatively seeks termination as a result of anti-social behaviour.
- The previous hearing was adjourned so the landlord could locate additional documentation to support its case.
- The landlord has now advised, shortly before the next scheduled hearing, that they want to withdraw the application.
- The landlord’s application is therefore dismissed.
- The Tribunal must, on the application of a party that has wholly or substantially succeeded in proceedings, order that the party’s name or identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the party’s conduct or any other circumstances of the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 tenant/s] has been the successful party here because the landlord has not pursued their application. I therefore award him suppression of his identifying details.