What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5211871?

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

How much money was awarded in case 5211871?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5211871?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5211871?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11943113-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5211871?

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

How much money was awarded in case 5211871?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5211871?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5211871?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11943113-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit 811, 139B Greys Avenue, Auckland Central, Auckland Tenancy Tribunal Case 5211871 — Tenancy dispute

Tenantcheck Insights

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Reasons

Only the landlord’s representative attended the hearing. Calls to the tenant at the time of the hearing went to voicemail.

On 23 April 2025 the Tribunal made an order terminating the tenancy and giving possession of the premises to the landlord immediately. The order was made on the ground that the tenant seriously assaulted another of the landlord’s tenants in the building that they both occupied.

On that same day the tenant applied for a rehearing on the grounds that she was attending a tangi at the time of the hearing, and she was unaware that she should have informed the Tribunal of that fact.

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.

Because the tenant has not attended today to speak to her application, it must be dismissed.

I note the following as well.

The tenant had arranged with her support person to receive the call at the time of the original hearing and the support person was expecting the tenant to be present.

Given the seriousness of the application and the circumstances that gave rise to it, it is incomprehensible that the tenant would not either make the necessary arrangements to attend the hearing or, at the very least, apply for an adjournment of the hearing.

The tenant vacated the premises after the Tribunal made the original order. She sought a stay of enforcement in her rehearing application, but it was refused. She did not appeal that decision. In the unlikely event that she had been granted a rehearing and the result of the rehearing was not to terminate her tenancy, there would be an obvious problem as to what remedy the Tribunal could have provided.

Reasons

Only the landlord’s representative attended the hearing. Calls to the tenant at the time of the hearing went to voicemail.

Because the tenant has not attended today to speak to her application, it must be dismissed.

I note the following as well.

The tenant had arranged with her support person to receive the call at the time of the original hearing and the support person was expecting the tenant to be present.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5211871 — Tenancy dispute at Unit 811, 139B Greys Avenue, Auckland Central, Auckland

At a glance

Claims & awards

Tenancy Tribunal case 5211871 — Tenancy dispute at Unit 811, 139B Greys Avenue, Auckland Central, Auckland

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Frequently asked questions

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Frequently asked questions