What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4725649?

The tribunal order states: The applications are dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

How much money was awarded in case 4725649?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4725649?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4725649?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9727125-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4725649?

The tribunal order states: The applications are dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

How much money was awarded in case 4725649?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4725649?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4725649?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9727125-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

149 Loburn Terrace Road, Loburn 7472 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4725649 — Exemplary damages

Tenantcheck Insights

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.

Mr and Mrs Bassett owned 40 acres of land. On an unknown date, Mr Thompson and Mr and Mrs Bassett entered into an agreement for the sale and purchase of 10 acres of the land (the property). Settlement of the purchase was intended to be June 2023 however, due to issues/delays with the subdivision of the 10 acres, the sale did not settle until September 2023.

Incorporated into the sale and purchase agreement was an agreement whereby Mr Thompson would rent the shed on the property to store his belongings. Mr Thompson subsequently moved a caravan onto the property for him to occupy. Rent was increased to $200 per week to recognise the additional use of the land by Mr Thompson.

The relationship between the parties broke down and both filed applications for compensation and exemplary damages. Mr and Mrs Bassett disputed the jurisdiction of the Tribunal to hear the applications.

Does the Tribunal have jurisdiction to hear the claims?

The Tribunal’s jurisdiction is limited to hearing and determining disputes between landlords and tenants (and between landlords and a guarantor of a tenant’s obligations) provided the dispute is in relation to a tenancy that comes within the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the Act).

The starting point in answering the question of whether the tenancy comes within the Act is section 4 which provides that the Act applies to all tenancies of residential premises unless specifically excluded.

Section 5(1) sets out occupancies which are excluded from the Act. The relevant ones here are sections 5(1)(o) and 5(1)(t). Section 5(1)(o) excludes occupancies: “where the tenant is the purchaser of the premises under a sale and purchase agreement with the landlord as vendor, not being an agreement that is revocable at will by the vendor:”

Section 5(1)(t) excludes occupancies: “where the premises comprise bare land (with or without facilities) on which the tenant has the right under the tenancy agreement to place or erect a mobile home, caravan, or other means of shelter:”

I have no hesitation in finding that Mr Thompson’s occupancy falls within both exclusions. Mr Thompson is the purchaser of the property under the sale and purchase agreement with Mr and Mrs Bassett and there is no evidence to support that the agreement is revocable at the will of Mr and Mrs Bassett.

The property is also bare land (with a shed used for storage) and Mr and Mrs Bassett have simply allowed Mr Thompson to place a caravan on the land for him to occupy.

This means that the occupancy of Mr Thompson is not one which comes within the Act and the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to hear and determine the applications.

The applications are therefore dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.

Does the Tribunal have jurisdiction to hear the claims?

The property is also bare land (with a shed used for storage) and Mr and Mrs Bassett have simply allowed Mr Thompson to place a caravan on the land for him to occupy.

This means that the occupancy of Mr Thompson is not one which comes within the Act and the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to hear and determine the applications.

The applications are therefore dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4725649 — Exemplary damages at 149 Loburn Terrace Road, Loburn 7472

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4725649 — Exemplary damages at 149 Loburn Terrace Road, Loburn 7472

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Does the Tribunal have jurisdiction to hear the claims?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Does the Tribunal have jurisdiction to hear the claims?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions