Tenancy Terminated Due to Significant Rent Arrears
📌 In brief
The Tenancy Tribunal ended a tenancy because the tenant was far behind on rent payments. The landlord showed proof of the arrears, and the tenant's arguments about jurisdiction and Maori land rights were not accepted.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant is entitled to have their tenancy terminated if they are significantly behind on rent payments.
📖 What the law says
This rule says that the Tenancy Tribunal must end a tenancy if the tenant owes at least 21 days of rent by the time the landlord applies to the Tribunal. It also allows termination if the tenant has caused or threatened significant damage to the property, or has assaulted or threatened the landlord or their family/agent.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a lawyer.
📖 Technical summary
The tenancy was terminated due to significant rent arrears.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tenancy Tribunal terminated the tenancy of a tenant due to significant rent arrears. The landlord provided proof of the arrears, and the tenant's arguments regarding jurisdiction and Maori land rights were not accepted.
📚 Full judgment Official document
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5100232 1
[2025] NZTT 5100232
TENANCY TRIBUNAL AT REMOTE LOCATION | TE TARAIPIUNARA RETIHANGA
APPLICANT: [redacted]
Landlord
RESPONDENT: [redacted]
Tenant
TENANCY ADDRESS: [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
ORDER
1. The tenancy of [NAME] at [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE] is terminated, and possession is granted to [NAME], at 7pm, Friday 7 March 2025.
2. The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,960.00 () to [NAME] immediately.
3. [NAME] must pay [NAME] $5,627.00 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below:
Description Landlord Tenant Rent arrears to 7 March 2025 $7,560.00 Filing fee reimbursement $27.00 Total award $7,587.00 Bond $1,960.00 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord $5,627.00
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5100232 2
Reasons:
1. Both parties attended the hearing, conducted via teleconference.
2. The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy, rent arrears and refund of the bond.
3. Rent was at least 21 days in arrears on the date the application was filed. The tenancy should be terminated. See section 55(1)(a) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
4. The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy is $7,560.00. The tenant did not dispute the quantum but rather the jurisdiction of this Tribunal to make any orders. He pointed out some recent payments towards the rent arrears, but these are not significant. He explained his challenges in accessing financial support. Unfortunately, any such challenge is for him to resolve in a timely manner if possible. It is not a defence to the significant rent arrears here.
5. The tenant argued the any termination and possession order would be a breach with regards to Tu Ture Whenua Maori Land Act 1993 and the Te Tiriti o Waitangi.
6. This argument was advanced by the tenant in a previous hearing and subsequent order (NZTT 4994489, 4997728 dated 3 December 2024) that terminated that tenancy. This related to what commenced as a landlord application for a cojoined tenancy, but it was determined by the adjudicator that two tenancies existed. That order dealt with the neighbouring premises. The tenancy here was confirmed as a separate tenancy. That order also made a partial release of what was effectively at that time an aggregated bond lodged over the two tenancies. The balance remaining at the Bond Centre relates to this tenancy and it is released to the landlord per this order. That 3 December 2024 order succinctly addresses the considerations such a claim as made in this instance by the tenant requires. Some of the reasoning from that order are repeated below where applicable.
7. The High Court in [NAME] v [COMPANY] HC AK CIV-2005-404-4618 [15 December 2005] involved an applicant claiming that she was subject only to Māori customary laws and under those laws she was entitled to possession of the property subject to the proceedings. The Tenancy Tribunal ordered possession be granted to the respondent pursuant to section 65 of the RTA. The applicant appealed this to the District Court which held that there were no meritorious reasons for challenging the respondent’s freehold title as registered proprietor. The applicant appealed to the High Court.
8. The High Court considered Te Tiriti/ the Treaty, particularly in relation to [NAME] of the land and the grant to Māori of the same rights and duties of citizenship as non-Māori. [ADDRESS] said these duties included compliance with
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5100232 3
the law. [ADDRESS] held that for the Court to fail to give effect to the rights of the respondent under the Land Transfer Act (“the LTA”) (which is the law that relates to ownership of property) would itself be an infringement of the law and of the Treaty of Waitangi.
9. [ADDRESS] further held that the LTA is the law which the Court must apply, in due exercise of the responsibility to apply the law as was contemplated by the signatories of the Treaty of Waitangi. [ADDRESS] then gave effect to the respondent’s right to possession under the LTA and dismissed the appeal.
10. There is no challenge from the tenant that the landlord is the owner as per the record of title. The landlord is entitled to the orders sought in her application here.
11. I am satisfied this is a residential tenancy and this Tribunal has jurisdiction to determine this application. The rent was, at the date on which the application was filed, at least 21 days in arrear and a termination order should be made.
12. I am not satisfied any conditional order should be made per s 55(1A) RTA.
13. The tenancy is terminated per the above orders.
Filing fee
14. [NAME] has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.
[NAME]
26 February 2025
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5100232 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 [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/
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5100232 5
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:
⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this
✅ Tends to be accepted
- The landlord proved the tenant was significantly behind on rent payments.
- The tenant did not dispute the amount of rent owed but challenged the tribunal's authority.
- The tribunal confirmed its jurisdiction to make orders based on the Residential Tenancies Act.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The tenant claimed the termination order would violate the Tu Ture Whenua Maori Land Act and the Treaty of Waitangi.
- The tenant argued previous rulings related to his tenancy and bond should affect this decision.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The tenancy was terminated because the tenant owed significant rent arrears.
What was the dispute about?
The dispute was over whether the tenancy should be terminated due to the tenant's failure to pay rent on time.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided to terminate the tenancy because the tenant had significant rent arrears, and the tenant's arguments about jurisdiction and Maori land rights were not accepted.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Residential Tenancies Act 1986, specifically section 55(1)(a), was applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The most important argument was the proof of significant rent arrears provided by the landlord.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was for the landlord who brought the case.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone who is significantly behind on rent payments may face termination of their tenancy.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The rent records showing the arrears were the key evidence.