Holiday Accommodation Dispute Dismissed by Tenancy Tribunal
📌 In brief
The Tenancy Tribunal dismissed a tenant's claim for a refund of unused holiday accommodation, ruling that the Residential Tenancies Act does not apply to holiday purposes.
⚖️ Legal holding
The Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to hear disputes arising from holiday accommodation.
📖 What the law says
This section lists specific situations where the Residential Tenancies Act does not apply. For example, it does not apply to commercial premises or parts of a prison or hospital.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a lawyer.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal dismissed the claim due to lack of jurisdiction.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tenancy Tribunal dismissed a claim brought by a tenant seeking a refund for unused holiday accommodation, finding that the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 does not apply to holiday purposes.
📚 Full judgment Official document
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5212571 1
[2025] NZTT 5212571
TENANCY TRIBUNAL AT AUCKLAND | TE TARAIPIUNARA RETIHANGA KI TĀMAKI MAKAURAU
APPLICANT: [redacted]
RESPONDENT: [redacted]
PURPORTED TENANCY ADDRESS:
[ADDRESS], [POSTCODE], [NAME]
ORDER
The application is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
Reasons:
1. The applicant attended the hearing in person.
2. [NAME] and [NAME] attended the hearing for the respondent.
3. [NAME] applies for refund of $414.29 for the cost of five days accommodation and the filing fee.
4. [NAME] booked and paid for two weeks accommodation at the premises for holiday purposes. Upon arrival, she was dissatisfied with the premises’ condition and only stayed for two days. The respondent refunded her one week’s accommodation but not the other unused five days’ accommodation.
5. Because the accommodation was for rental purposes, the Tribunal must consider s 5(1)(m) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA). That paragraph provides:
5 Act excluded in certain cases (1) This Act shall not apply in the following cases:
(a)… … (m) where the premises are let for the tenant’s holiday purposes:
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5212571 2
Legal principles
6. The long title of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) states, among other things, it is a establish a Tribunal to determine disputes between landlords and tenants of residential properties:
An Act to reform and restate the law relating to residential tenancies, to define the rights and obligations of landlords and tenants of residential properties, to establish a tribunal to determine expeditiously disputes arising between such landlords and tenants, to establish a fund in which bonds payable by such tenants are to be held, and to repeal the Tenancy Act 1955 and the Rent Appeal Act 1973 and their amendments
7. The RTA sets out the Tribunal’s jurisdiction under the heading “Jurisdiction” at ss 77- 85. Section 77(1) is the foundational subsection:
77 Jurisdiction of Tribunal
(1) The Tribunal has, subject to the Limitation Act 2010, jurisdiction to determine in accordance with this Act 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.
(Emphasis added)
8. There is no getting out of the Act if there is a residential tenancy. Section 4 of the RTA provides that:
This Act applies to every tenancy for residential purposes except as specifically provided.
9. Consonant with s 4, s 11 of the RTA provides that an agreement to exclude the Act is “of no effect”.1
Discussion
10. In this case the RTA had “specifically provided” that the RTA does not apply where the premises “are let for the tenant’s holiday purposes”
11. The premises were let for the tenant’s holiday purposes.
12. It follows that the RTA does not apply, and the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to hear and determine the applicant’s claim.
Conclusion
13. The Tribunal cannot hear the claim. It is dismissed.
1 There are limited exceptions set out in s 11 that do not apply here.
https://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1986/0120/latest/link.aspx?search=sw_096be8ed81a4b016_jurisdiction_25_se&p=1&id=DLM2033100
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5212571 3
Addendum
14. The appropriate forum is probably the Disputes Tribunal. If the tenant cannot agree to a resolution with the respondent, she may wish to file a claim in that tribunal.
R Kee
23 May 2025
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5212571 4
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 0800 836 262 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 http://www.tenancy.govt.nz/disputes/enforcing-decisions/
Reasons:
⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this
✅ Tends to be accepted
- The accommodation was for holiday purposes, not residential purposes.
- The Residential Tenancies Act 1986 specifically excludes cases where premises are let for the tenant’s holiday purposes.
- The Tribunal does not have jurisdiction over disputes arising from holiday accommodation.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The applicant requested a refund for unused accommodation days and the filing fee.
- The Tribunal should consider the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 for holiday accommodation disputes.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The Tenancy Tribunal dismissed the tenant's claim for a refund of unused holiday accommodation.
What was the dispute about?
The dispute was about whether the tenant was entitled to a refund for unused holiday accommodation.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided to dismiss the claim because the Residential Tenancies Act does not apply to holiday accommodation.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Residential Tenancies Act 1986, section 5(1)(m) was applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was that the accommodation was for holiday purposes, thus falling outside the scope of the Residential Tenancies Act.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was against the person who brought the case.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation would need to seek resolution through another forum, such as the Disputes Tribunal.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The judgment does not specify the evidence or documents that mattered.