What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5392249?

The tribunal order states: The application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 5392249?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5392249?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5392249?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13118007-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5392249?

The tribunal order states: The application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 5392249?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5392249?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5392249?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13118007-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Room Suite 2, 583 Manukau Road, Epsom, Auckland 1023, Tenancy Tribunal Case 5392249 — Tenancy dispute

Reasons

The Applicant attended the hearing. The Respondent did not appear.

The Applicant has applied for the refund of the bond.

There is a preliminary issue whether the Tribunal can hear the claim. Section 77(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 provides that the Tribunal has jurisdiction to hear claims between landlords and tenants relating to any tenancy to which the Act applies. Section 4 RTA provides that the Act applies to all residential tenancies unless specifically excluded.

Section 2(1) RTA defines a landlord as the grantor of a tenancy under a tenancy agreement of residential premises. A tenant is the grantee of the tenancy. The terms ’residential premises’, ‘tenancy’, and ‘tenancy agreement’ are defined as: 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 tenancy, in relation to any residential premises, means the right to occupy the premises (whether exclusively or otherwise) in consideration for rent; and includes any tenancy of residential premises implied or created by any enactment; and, where appropriate, also includes a former tenancy tenancy agreement, in relation to any residential premises, means any express or implied agreement under which any person, for rent, grants or agrees to grant to any other person a tenancy of the premises; and, where appropriate, includes a former tenancy agreement and any variation of a tenancy agreement

Section 5 RTA sets out a variety of circumstances where a tenancy is excluded from the Act. Section 10 RTA provides that, where a party to proceedings contends that the Act does not apply, they must establish the facts supporting their contention. In other words, they have the burden of proving the Act does not apply.

Section 5(1)(a) RTA provides the RTA does not apply where the premises are commercial premises.

The Applicant produced a document titled “Deed of Lease” identifying the Respondent as the Landlord and “Taste of Thai Limited” as the Tenant. The Applicant was a Director of Taste of Thai Limited until 15 July 2025. He further confirmed that he did not reside at the premises, but instead operated his restaurant business from that location. The Deed of Lease expressly referred to the permitted use as “Business for Thai Restaurant and Takeaway,” contained provisions relating to landlord’s insurance consistent with a commercial arrangement, and specified the lease of the premises and associated carparks for business purposes. The terms and structure of the agreement were characteristic of a commercial lease rather than a residential tenancy.

Having considered the evidence and the Applicant’s own submissions, I am satisfied that the predominant use of the premises was for the operation of a business. The lease was entered into for the purpose of enabling Taste of Thai Limited to conduct its restaurant enterprise, and the Applicant did not occupy the premises as his residence. I find that the agreement is a commercial lease. As such, it falls outside the scope of the Residential Tenancies Act and is therefore excluded from the Tribunal’s jurisdiction under that Act.

The application is dismissed. The Applicant may wish to seek compensation at a different Tribunal.

As the Applicant has not been successful, name suppression is not granted to the Applicant.

Order

The application is dismissed.

Reasons

The Applicant attended the hearing. The Respondent did not appear.
The Applicant has applied for the refund of the bond.
There is a preliminary issue whether the Tribunal can hear the claim. Section 77(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 provides that the Tribunal has jurisdiction to hear claims between landlords and tenants relating to any tenancy to which the Act applies. Section 4 RTA provides that the Act applies to all residential tenancies unless specifically excluded.
Section 2(1) RTA defines a landlord as the grantor of a tenancy under a tenancy agreement of residential premises. A tenant is the grantee of the tenancy. The terms ’residential premises’, ‘tenancy’, and ‘tenancy agreement’ are defined as: 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 tenancy, in relation to any residential premises, means the right to occupy the premises (whether exclusively or otherwise) in consideration for rent; and includes any tenancy of residential premises implied or created by any enactment; and, where appropriate, also includes a former tenancy tenancy agreement, in relation to any residential premises, means any express or implied agreement under which any person, for rent, grants or agrees to grant to any other person a tenancy of the premises; and, where appropriate, includes a former tenancy agreement and any variation of a tenancy agreement
Section 5 RTA sets out a variety of circumstances where a tenancy is excluded from the Act. Section 10 RTA provides that, where a party to proceedings contends that the Act does not apply, they must establish the facts supporting their contention. In other words, they have the burden of proving the Act does not apply.
Section 5(1)(a) RTA provides the RTA does not apply where the premises are commercial premises.
The Applicant produced a document titled “Deed of Lease” identifying the Respondent as the Landlord and “Taste of Thai Limited” as the Tenant. The Applicant was a Director of Taste of Thai Limited until 15 July 2025. He further confirmed that he did not reside at the premises, but instead operated his restaurant business from that location. The Deed of Lease expressly referred to the permitted use as “Business for Thai Restaurant and Takeaway,” contained provisions relating to landlord’s insurance consistent with a commercial arrangement, and specified the lease of the premises and associated carparks for business purposes. The terms and structure of the agreement were characteristic of a commercial lease rather than a residential tenancy.
Having considered the evidence and the Applicant’s own submissions, I am satisfied that the predominant use of the premises was for the operation of a business. The lease was entered into for the purpose of enabling Taste of Thai Limited to conduct its restaurant enterprise, and the Applicant did not occupy the premises as his residence. I find that the agreement is a commercial lease. As such, it falls outside the scope of the Residential Tenancies Act and is therefore excluded from the Tribunal’s jurisdiction under that Act.
The application is dismissed. The Applicant may wish to seek compensation at a different Tribunal.
As the Applicant has not been successful, name suppression is not granted to the Applicant.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5392249 — Tenancy dispute at Room Suite 2, 583 Manukau Road, Epsom, Auckland 1023,

At a glance

Claims & awards

Tenancy Tribunal case 5392249 — Tenancy dispute at Room Suite 2, 583 Manukau Road, Epsom, Auckland 1023,

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