What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5126911?

The tribunal order states: Jurisdiction is declined and therefore, the application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 5126911?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5126911?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5126911?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11716992-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5126911?

The tribunal order states: Jurisdiction is declined and therefore, the application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 5126911?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5126911?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5126911?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11716992-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

7 Fraser Road, Mount Wellington, Auckland 1072 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5126911 — Tenancy dispute

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing, which was conducted via teleconference. Mr Hodgson represented the applicant tenant, Motoka Limited. Mr Baker and Ms Strbac (counsel), attended for the respondent, Fraser Road Development Limited (the landlord).

The landlord and tenant entered into a lease commencing on 1 June 2023, for premises described as Yard 1 & IA Fraser Road, Mt Wellington. This lease records the landlord as Fraser Road Land Limited. The tenant has applied to the Tribunal seeking compensation for power charges invoiced by the landlord.

The first issue is whether the Tribunal has jurisdiction to determine this dispute.

Mr Hodgson explained his understanding was that the Tribunal was able to deal with this type of dispute, up to a maximum of $100,000. He had sought advice from Tenancy Services. He stated the premises was a vacant concrete site, and no part of it was residential.

The landlord submits that sections 5(1)(a) and 77(1) of the RTA applied and the Tribunal did not have jurisdiction to deal with the issue. Legal framework

The Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the RTA) applies to every tenancy for residential purposes.

“Residential premises” means any premises used or intended for occupation by any person as a place of residence, whether or not the occupation or intended occupation for residential purposes is or would be unlawful.

A tenancy, in relation to any residential premises, means the right to occupy the premises (whether exclusively or otherwise) in consideration for rent...

Section 77(1) of the RTA provides that the Tenancy Tribunal has jurisdiction to determine (in accordance with the RTA) any dispute that: (a) exists between a landlord and a tenant or between a landlord and the guarantor of a tenant; and (b) relates to any tenancy to which this Act applies or to which this Act did apply at any material time. .

Section 5 of the RTA sets out the exclusions and states that:

Act excluded in certain cases (1) This Act shall not apply in the following cases: (a) where the premises are commercial premises: Analysis

In this case it is not disputed that the lease is a commercial lease, and the premises are commercial premises. The tenant has also confirmed that there was no residential component to the premises.

The RTA provides that the Tenancy Tribunal only has jurisdiction to determine disputes between a landlord and tenant of residential premises. The definition of residential premises notes the requirement that the premises be used or be intended for occupation by a person as a place of residence. Furthermore, Section 5(1)(a) specifically excludes commercial premises from the RTA.

While there are cases where premises used for commercial and residential purposes are deemed to be residential premises, 1 that is not the situation here, as confirmed by the tenant. The lease states the tenant is to use the premises for its business use, and describes the business use as “yard use as permitted by the district plan.”

Therefore, as the premises is excluded under the RTA, there is no jurisdiction for the Tribunal to determine this dispute. Accordingly, jurisdiction is declined, and the application is dismissed. Name suppression

An application for suppression has been made in this case by the tenant. Having had regard to the interests of the parties and the public interest, and noting that the tenant is the unsuccessful party, the Tribunal declines the tenant’s request for name suppression.

Order

Jurisdiction is declined and therefore, the application is dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing, which was conducted via teleconference. Mr Hodgson represented the applicant tenant, Motoka Limited. Mr Baker and Ms Strbac (counsel), attended for the respondent, Fraser Road Development Limited (the landlord).
The landlord and tenant entered into a lease commencing on 1 June 2023, for premises described as Yard 1 & IA Fraser Road, Mt Wellington. This lease records the landlord as Fraser Road Land Limited. The tenant has applied to the Tribunal seeking compensation for power charges invoiced by the landlord.
The first issue is whether the Tribunal has jurisdiction to determine this dispute.
Mr Hodgson explained his understanding was that the Tribunal was able to deal with this type of dispute, up to a maximum of $100,000. He had sought advice from Tenancy Services. He stated the premises was a vacant concrete site, and no part of it was residential.
The landlord submits that sections 5(1)(a) and 77(1) of the RTA applied and the Tribunal did not have jurisdiction to deal with the issue. Legal framework
The Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the RTA) applies to every tenancy for residential purposes.
“Residential premises” means any premises used or intended for occupation by any person as a place of residence, whether or not the occupation or intended occupation for residential purposes is or would be unlawful.
A tenancy, in relation to any residential premises, means the right to occupy the premises (whether exclusively or otherwise) in consideration for rent...
Section 77(1) of the RTA provides that the Tenancy Tribunal has jurisdiction to determine (in accordance with the RTA) any dispute that: (a) exists between a landlord and a tenant or between a landlord and the guarantor of a tenant; and (b) relates to any tenancy to which this Act applies or to which this Act did apply at any material time. .
Section 5 of the RTA sets out the exclusions and states that:
Act excluded in certain cases (1) This Act shall not apply in the following cases: (a) where the premises are commercial premises: Analysis
In this case it is not disputed that the lease is a commercial lease, and the premises are commercial premises. The tenant has also confirmed that there was no residential component to the premises.
The RTA provides that the Tenancy Tribunal only has jurisdiction to determine disputes between a landlord and tenant of residential premises. The definition of residential premises notes the requirement that the premises be used or be intended for occupation by a person as a place of residence. Furthermore, Section 5(1)(a) specifically excludes commercial premises from the RTA.
While there are cases where premises used for commercial and residential purposes are deemed to be residential premises, 1 that is not the situation here, as confirmed by the tenant. The lease states the tenant is to use the premises for its business use, and describes the business use as “yard use as permitted by the district plan.”
Therefore, as the premises is excluded under the RTA, there is no jurisdiction for the Tribunal to determine this dispute. Accordingly, jurisdiction is declined, and the application is dismissed. Name suppression
An application for suppression has been made in this case by the tenant. Having had regard to the interests of the parties and the public interest, and noting that the tenant is the unsuccessful party, the Tribunal declines the tenant’s request for name suppression.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5126911 — Tenancy dispute at 7 Fraser Road, Mount Wellington, Auckland 1072

At a glance

Claims & awards

Tenancy Tribunal case 5126911 — Tenancy dispute at 7 Fraser Road, Mount Wellington, Auckland 1072

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