What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4941794?

The tribunal order states: Puketaha Farming Enterprises Limited is granted possession of the premises at

How much money was awarded in case 4941794?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4941794?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4941794?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10750066-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4941794?

The tribunal order states: Puketaha Farming Enterprises Limited is granted possession of the premises at

How much money was awarded in case 4941794?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4941794?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4941794?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10750066-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

591 Puketaha Road, Puketaha, RD 1, Hamilton 3281 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4941794 — Tenancy dispute

Reasons

This matter was part heard on 13 August 2024 as to the issue of jurisdiction and possession of the premises.

In an order dated 16 August 2024 (“the earlier order”), the Tribunal held that it did have jurisdiction to consider the landlord’s claims. The reasons are set out in that order and I do not propose repeating them.

Having found that the Tribunal did have jurisdiction, the parties were invited to make such further submissions on the issue of possession under sections 64 and 65 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”) as they wished, with a view to the Tribunal considering those submissions and then making an order without the need for a further appearance by the parties.

Both parties have filed written submissions. I record that the evidence and submissions provided by the tenant which did not relate to the issue of possession have not been considered in making this order. All other submissions by both landlord and tenant have been considered.

Section 65 RTA provides that the Tribunal “shall” make an order for possession where it is satisfied of three issues. The use of the word” shall” means that the Tribunal does not have discretion to act otherwise.

The first of the issues is whether these are residential premises? In the earlier order, the Tribunal had not difficulty in finding that these were residential premises and the reasons are set out in that order.

The second issue is whether the landlord entitled to possession? For the reasons set out at paragraphs 34 to 36 of the earlier order, the Tribunal held that the landlord was entitled to possess.

The third issue is whether the tenant in in possession pursuant to any right of occupation granted by any person with lawful authority to do so?

In the earlier order, the Tribunal held: “Having found that the landlord is entitled to possession pursuant to the Lease and variation documents, was Richard Morrow a person with lawful authority to grant a right of possession to the tenant? Richard Morrow is a trustee of the trust with the usual obligations to the beneficiaries of the trust. It was the Trust that leased the land to the landlord and having found that this is a service tenancy, the owner’s rights came to an end when the lease commenced. Richard Morrow was therefore not a party lawfully entitled to grant a right of occupation to the tenant.”

Having signed a valid lease, the owner was no longer entitled to grant a tenancy or other form of occupation right during the term of the lease. I find in favour of the landlord and make an order for possession in favour of the landlord under s. 64 RTA.

The tenant has sought an extension of the usual time frame for granting possession. The tenant seeks an extension to 4 September 2024 as she has a Doctors appointment on 2 September 2024 and needs time to house her chickens and dogs.

The appointment notice provided by the tenant in support of the delay refers to an appointment on 25 September 2024, not 2 September 2024.

Possession of the premises is granted to the landlord at 11.59 am on Monday 4 September 2024.

The tenant applied for name suppression. The tenant has not been wholly or substantially successful in this matter and the application for suppression is dismissed.

Order

Puketaha Farming Enterprises Limited is granted possession of the premises at 591 Puketaha Road, Puketaha, RD 1, Hamilton 3281 at 11.59 am on Monday 4 September 2024.

Reasons

This matter was part heard on 13 August 2024 as to the issue of jurisdiction and possession of the premises.
In an order dated 16 August 2024 (“the earlier order”), the Tribunal held that it did have jurisdiction to consider the landlord’s claims. The reasons are set out in that order and I do not propose repeating them.
Having found that the Tribunal did have jurisdiction, the parties were invited to make such further submissions on the issue of possession under sections 64 and 65 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”) as they wished, with a view to the Tribunal considering those submissions and then making an order without the need for a further appearance by the parties.
Both parties have filed written submissions. I record that the evidence and submissions provided by the tenant which did not relate to the issue of possession have not been considered in making this order. All other submissions by both landlord and tenant have been considered.
Section 65 RTA provides that the Tribunal “shall” make an order for possession where it is satisfied of three issues. The use of the word” shall” means that the Tribunal does not have discretion to act otherwise.
The first of the issues is whether these are residential premises? In the earlier order, the Tribunal had not difficulty in finding that these were residential premises and the reasons are set out in that order.
The second issue is whether the landlord entitled to possession? For the reasons set out at paragraphs 34 to 36 of the earlier order, the Tribunal held that the landlord was entitled to possess.
The third issue is whether the tenant in in possession pursuant to any right of occupation granted by any person with lawful authority to do so?
In the earlier order, the Tribunal held: “Having found that the landlord is entitled to possession pursuant to the Lease and variation documents, was Richard Morrow a person with lawful authority to grant a right of possession to the tenant? Richard Morrow is a trustee of the trust with the usual obligations to the beneficiaries of the trust. It was the Trust that leased the land to the landlord and having found that this is a service tenancy, the owner’s rights came to an end when the lease commenced. Richard Morrow was therefore not a party lawfully entitled to grant a right of occupation to the tenant.”
Having signed a valid lease, the owner was no longer entitled to grant a tenancy or other form of occupation right during the term of the lease. I find in favour of the landlord and make an order for possession in favour of the landlord under s. 64 RTA.
The tenant has sought an extension of the usual time frame for granting possession. The tenant seeks an extension to 4 September 2024 as she has a Doctors appointment on 2 September 2024 and needs time to house her chickens and dogs.
The appointment notice provided by the tenant in support of the delay refers to an appointment on 25 September 2024, not 2 September 2024.
Possession of the premises is granted to the landlord at 11.59 am on Monday 4 September 2024.
The tenant applied for name suppression. The tenant has not been wholly or substantially successful in this matter and the application for suppression is dismissed.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4941794 — Tenancy dispute at 591 Puketaha Road, Puketaha, RD 1, Hamilton 3281

At a glance

Claims & awards

Tenancy Tribunal case 4941794 — Tenancy dispute at 591 Puketaha Road, Puketaha, RD 1, Hamilton 3281

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Property management

Frequently asked questions