Tenantcheck Insights · Case study
Tenancy Tribunal case 5507033 — Boarding House
Decided 25 May 2026 · Published 25 May 2026 · Application 5507033
- Boarding House
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 Harvey-Lane
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 landlord’s and tenant’s name and identifying details.
- The application is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
Reasons
- The landlord attended the hearing. The tenant did not attend the hearing, and it proceeded in their absence.
- The applicant has applied for termination of the tenancy. Jurisdiction
- There is a preliminary issue as to whether the Tribunal has jurisdiction to hear this claim.
- Section 77(1) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) provides that the Tribunal may hear disputes between landlords and tenants relating to tenancies to which the RTA applies.
- Section 5(1)(n) of the RTA excludes from the RTA any arrangement where the premises, not being a boarding house, are used during the tenancy principally as a place of residence by the landlord or a member of the landlord’s family.
- In this case, the owner resides at the property and has brought in the other party to live there. There is also a further flatmate at the property. The arrangement is one where both parties have their own bedrooms and share the common areas, and the agreement provides for a two-week notice period.
- Although the parties have signed a standard tenancy agreement, the substance of the arrangement is that of a flatmate or boarder, not a tenancy to which the RTA applies.
- Section 8 of the RTA allows parties to an excluded tenancy (under sections 5 to 7) to agree in writing that the RTA, or certain provisions of it, will apply to their arrangement. However, for section 8 to be effective, there must be a clear and express agreement between the parties to contract back into the RTA. Simply signing a standard tenancy agreement, without any express reference to section 8 or a clear intention to contract back into the RTA, is not sufficient.
- In this case, there is no evidence that the parties expressly agreed to contract back into the RTA under section 8. The use of a standard tenancy agreement alone does not override the exclusion in section 5(1)(n) where the landlord lives in the premises, and the arrangement is substantively that of a flatmate or boarder. Summary
- Section 8 of the RTA does not apply in this situation because there is no express agreement to contract back into the RTA. The arrangement remains excluded under section 5(1)(n), and the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to hear this claim.
- As I have found that the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction, I have suppressed all names and details. I do not consider that publication is in the public interest or is justified given and nature and circumstances of the case. R Harvey-Lane 25 May 2026