What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5317620?

The tribunal order states: The tenant’s application for name suppression is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 5317620?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5317620?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5317620?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13263497-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5317620?

The tribunal order states: The tenant’s application for name suppression is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 5317620?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5317620?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5317620?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13263497-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

23 Serena Key, Papamoa Beach, Papamoa 3118 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5317620 — Tenancy dispute

Tenantcheck Insights

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Reasons

On 16 January 2026, the Tribunal directed a rehearing of the tenant’s application for name suppression of its order dated 13 October 2025.

Only the landlord attended the rehearing of the tenant’s application for name suppression today. The tenant did not attend.

I now address the tenant’s request for name suppression of one of the tenant’s name and identifying details pursuant to section 95A of the Act.

Neither tenant in this case has been wholly or substantially successful in their defence of the landlord’s claims. The Tribunal on 13 October 2025 ordered both tenants to pay the landlord $1,500.00 in compensation from the bond. Water rates of $513.78 is also owing at the end of the tenancy.

Tenants are jointly and severally liable under the tenancy agreement.

Consequently section 95A(1) of the Act does not apply.

Section 95A(4) of the Act nevertheless allows a party to request that the name and identifying details of the tenant are suppressed.

However, in order to grant name suppression, the Tribunal must “have regard to the interests of the parties and to the public interest”. Applying those considerations requires a balancing exercise of two potentially competing considerations, because the interest of the parties may not be in concert with the interests of the public.

In this case, the tenant submitted in the rehearing application that there is an interest in Morgan Dravitzki receiving name suppression, because publication of name may present difficulty for her in finding a new tenancy for her and the children she shares with Jason Dravitzki (who Morgan is estranged/separated from).

On the other side of the scales, I must weigh the public interest.

The Dictionary of New Zealand Law (P Spiller New Zealand Law Dictionary (9th ed, LexisNexis, Wellington, 2019)) defines public interest as “[a]n interest common to the public at large or a significant portion of the public.”

The Office of the Ombudsman broadly equates public interest “to the concept of public good”, which covers “a wide range of values and principles relating to the public good, or what is in the best interests of society”. See Ombudsman’s Office “Guide: Public Interest” (August 2019) ”https://www.ombudsman.parliament.nz/sites/default/files/2020- 07/Public_interest_August_2019.pdf”

Generally, the open reporting of justice is in the public interest. See R v Liddell [1995] NZLR 538 [1994] 12 CRNZ 458 (CA) at [464]

Taking into consideration the parties’ interest, alongside that of the public interest, I find the public interest considerations outweigh the tenant’s considerations therefore supporting the principle of open reporting.

For those reasons, I decline the tenant’s application for name suppression.

Reasons

On 16 January 2026, the Tribunal directed a rehearing of the tenant’s application for name suppression of its order dated 13 October 2025.

Only the landlord attended the rehearing of the tenant’s application for name suppression today. The tenant did not attend.

I now address the tenant’s request for name suppression of one of the tenant’s name and identifying details pursuant to section 95A of the Act.

Tenants are jointly and severally liable under the tenancy agreement.

Consequently section 95A(1) of the Act does not apply.

Section 95A(4) of the Act nevertheless allows a party to request that the name and identifying details of the tenant are suppressed.

On the other side of the scales, I must weigh the public interest.

Generally, the open reporting of justice is in the public interest. See R v Liddell [1995] NZLR 538 [1994] 12 CRNZ 458 (CA) at [464]

For those reasons, I decline the tenant’s application for name suppression.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5317620 — Tenancy dispute at 23 Serena Key, Papamoa Beach, Papamoa 3118

At a glance

Claims & awards

Tenancy Tribunal case 5317620 — Tenancy dispute at 23 Serena Key, Papamoa Beach, Papamoa 3118

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