What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5109948?

The tribunal order states: The application for rehearing is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 5109948?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5109948?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5109948?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11761972-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5109948?

The tribunal order states: The application for rehearing is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 5109948?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5109948?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5109948?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11761972-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

48 May Road, Mt Roskill, Auckland 1041 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5109948 — Rent arrears

Tenantcheck Insights

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.

On 22 January 2025 the Tribunal made an order for termination and rent arrears.

On 18 March 2025, Samanth Tihi (aka Tihi-Nuku) applied for a rehearing.

Section 105(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 provides that the Tribunal has the power to order a rehearing where “a substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice has or may have occurred or is likely to occur”.

Usually, the party applying for the rehearing must show that something went wrong with the Tribunal’s procedure, for example, that they did not receive notice of the hearing or they were not able to properly present their case. A rehearing may also be granted where there is new evidence that was not reasonably available at the first hearing, if it could have affected the outcome.

The District Court has held that if the Tribunal was simply wrong in its findings of fact, or its application of the law, this is not sufficient to establish a miscarriage of justice: a rehearing is not an alternative to an appeal. Furthermore, a rehearing will not be granted just because a party is unhappy with the decision, or to give them a second opportunity to present their case.

Has a substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice occurred?

Ms Tihi-Nuku submits that a rehearing should be granted on spiritual grounds. Ms Tihi-Nuku submits that the property does not belong to Kainga Ora - Homes and Communities and belongs to the Lord. Ms Tihi-Nuku submits that Kainga Ora – Homes and Communities had no lawful basis to request termination of the tenancy or enforce payment of rent. Ms Tihi-Nuku states that Kainga Ora – Homes and Communities owe her $1,200.00 in rent, which the Lord has requested she recover.

Ms Tihi-Nuku submits that the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to order termination of the tenancy. Ms Tihi-Nuku states that the Lord is the owner of heavens and earth and it is only for Him to pass judgement on other people, not the landlord or the Tribunal.

Ms Tihi-Nuku’s submissions reflect a disagreement with the jurisdiction of the Tribunal to hear the original matter, as well as a disagreement with the substantive decision recorded in the order dated 22 January 2025. The appropriate course of action to address this type of disagreement is to file an appeal with the District Court within the relevant timeframe, not seek a rehearing.

Ms Tihi-Nuku has not identified a procedural error that is likely to have led to a miscarriage of justice or substantial wrong. Ms Tihi-Nuku has not referred to any new evidence that was not reasonably available at the first hearing that she would like to submit in defence to the landlord’s claim for rent arrears and termination.

In all of the circumstances, I am not convinced on the balance of probabilities that a substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice may have occurred.

The application for a rehearing is declined.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.

On 22 January 2025 the Tribunal made an order for termination and rent arrears.

On 18 March 2025, Samanth Tihi (aka Tihi-Nuku) applied for a rehearing.

Has a substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice occurred?

In all of the circumstances, I am not convinced on the balance of probabilities that a substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice may have occurred.

The application for a rehearing is declined.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5109948 — Rent arrears at 48 May Road, Mt Roskill, Auckland 1041

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5109948 — Rent arrears at 48 May Road, Mt Roskill, Auckland 1041

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Has a substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice occurred?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Has a substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice occurred?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions