VadeLab
Struck OutTenancy Tribunal·

Hearing Vacated Due to Improper Service of Application

Case No.

📌 In brief

The Tenancy Tribunal at Manukau cancelled a scheduled hearing because the landlord did not follow the correct procedures for serving the application. This decision highlights the importance of following the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 when serving notices.

⚖️ Legal holding

A landlord must ensure proper service of applications according to the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

Topics

service requirementsproper notice

Provisions

Residential Tenancies Act 1986, s 91A(2)Residential Tenancies Act 1986, s 91B

📖 Technical summary

The hearing was vacated due to improper service of the application.

📜 Headnote Official document

The Tenancy Tribunal at Manukau vacated a scheduled hearing due to improper service of the application. The landlord failed to serve the application properly, as required by the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

📚 Full judgment Official document

__________________________________________________________________________________ 4983293 1

[2025] NZTT 4983293

TENANCY TRIBUNAL AT MANUKAU | TE TARAIPIUNARA RETIHANGA KI MANUKAU

APPLICANT: [redacted]

Landlord

RESPONDENT: [redacted]

Tenant

TENANCY ADDRESS: [ADDRESS], [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

ORDER

1. The hearing scheduled at 9.30am on Monday 3 March 2025 is hereby vacated.

2. The landlord is to provide the Tribunal with a current service address for the tenant.

3. The application is returned to Tenancy Services for further service.

4. If a service address for the tenant cannot be provided, the landlord may apply to the Tribunal for a direction that the application is to be served by some other means or that service be dispensed with.

Reasons:

1. The landlord’s application for vacated costs has been scheduled for hearing at 9.30am on Monday 3 March 2025.

2. The application was filed more than two months after the end of the tenancy so the usual service rules no longer apply.

3. The application must be served either personally on the tenant, on someone over the age of 16 living at address where the tenant now lives, or by post to an address provided by the tenant within two months before the application was made. See section 91A(2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

__________________________________________________________________________________ 4983293 2

4. The landlord has emailed the Registry today to say that the tenant is no longer based at the address the landlord gave the Registry previously.

5. The landlord emailed that they have been advised that the tenant may not be aware that the hearing is scheduled and that she has no access to phone or email.

6. The landlord should find out where the tenant’s rehab centre is presently so that the Tribunal can give proper service of the next notice of hearing to the tenant.

7. The landlord should also enquire with the tenant’s lawyer to find out if the lawyer has instructions to accept service of process.

8. Given that the tenant has not been served with proper notice of the hearing, the hearing on Monday cannot proceed.

9. The application has not been served in accordance with section 91A(2) requirements.

10. The hearing cannot proceed until effective service has taken place.

11. If the landlord cannot locate the tenant, despite making all reasonable efforts to do so, the landlord may apply to the Tribunal for a direction that the application is to be served by some other means likely to bring it to the tenant’s notice.

12. Alternatively, the landlord may apply to the Tribunal for a direction that service be dispensed with. See section 91B Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

[NAME]

28 February 2025

__________________________________________________________________________________ 4983293 3

Please read carefully: Visit justice.govt.nz/tribunals/tenancy/rehearings-appeals for more information on rehearings and appeals.

Rehearings You can apply for a rehearing if you believe that a substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice has happened. For example: • you did not get the letter telling you the date of the hearing, or • the adjudicator improperly admitted or rejected evidence, or • new evidence, relating to the original application, has become available.

You must give reasons and evidence to support your application for a rehearing. A rehearing will not be granted just because you disagree with the decision. You must apply within five working days of the decision using the Application for Rehearing form: justice.govt.nz/assets/Documents/Forms/TT-Application-for-rehearing.pdf

Right of Appeal Both the landlord and the tenant can file an appeal. You should file your appeal at the District Court where the original hearing took place. The cost for an appeal is $260. You must apply within 10 working days after the decision is issued using this Appeal to the District Court form: justice.govt.nz/tribunals/tenancy/rehearings-appeals

Grounds for an appeal You can appeal if you think the decision was wrong, but not because you don’t like the decision. For some cases, there’ll be no right to appeal. For example, you can’t appeal: • against an interim order • a final order for the payment of less than $1000 • a final order to undertake work worth less than $1000.

Enforcement Where the Tribunal made an order about money or property this is called a civil debt. The Ministry of Justice Collections Team can assist with enforcing civil debt. You can contact the collections team on [PHONE] or go to justice.govt.nz/fines/civil-debt for forms and information.

Notice to a party ordered to pay money or vacate premises, etc. Failure to comply with any order may result in substantial additional costs for enforcement. It may also involve being ordered to appear in the District Court for an examination of your means or seizure of your property.

If you require further help or information regarding this matter, visit tenancy.govt.nz/disputes/enforcing- decisions or phone Tenancy Services on [PHONE].

Mēna ka hiahia koe ki ētahi atu awhina, kōrero ranei mo tēnei take, haere ki tenei ipurangi tenancy.govt.nz/disputes/enforcing-decisions, waea atu ki Ratonga Takirua ma runga [PHONE] ranei.

https://www.justice.govt.nz/tribunals/tenancy/rehearings-appeals https://www.justice.govt.nz/assets/Documents/Forms/TT-Application-for-rehearing.pdf https://www.justice.govt.nz/tribunals/tenancy/rehearings-appeals/ https://www.justice.govt.nz/fines/about-civil-debt/ https://www.tenancy.govt.nz/disputes/enforcing-decisions https://www.tenancy.govt.nz/disputes/enforcing-decisions http://www.tenancy.govt.nz/disputes/enforcing-decisions/

__________________________________________________________________________________ 4983293 4

A manaomia nisi faamatalaga poo se fesoasoani, e uiga i lau mataupu, asiasi ifo le matou aupega tafailagi: tenancy.govt.nz/disputes/enforcing-decisions, pe fesootai mai le Tenancy Services i le numera [PHONE].

Reasons:

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The hearing was vacated because the landlord did not properly serve the application.

What was the dispute about?

The dispute was about whether the landlord followed the correct procedure for serving the application.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided to vacate the hearing because the landlord failed to serve the application according to the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

Which laws or rules were applied?

The Residential Tenancies Act 1986, sections 91A(2) and 91B were applied.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The argument that mattered most was that the landlord did not follow the proper service requirements set out in the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?

The decision was against the person who brought the case, the landlord.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone in a similar situation should ensure that they follow the proper service requirements set out in the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

What evidence or documents mattered?

The judgment does not specify any particular evidence or documents that mattered.

Official source: Tenancy Tribunal headnote and full judgment reproduced from the court's public records. View on the official source ↗Summary, holding, technical summary and questions: produced by Artificial Intelligence based on the official headnote and judgment. These are VadeLab’s own material and are not the work of the Court.This decision was issued by the Tenancy Tribunal and is reproduced from its published records. VadeLab is not affiliated with, and this page is not endorsed by, that court or tribunal.