Tenancy Tribunal dismisses landlord's termination claim for insufficient evidence
📌 In brief
The Tenancy Tribunal dismissed the landlord's application to end the tenancy due to the tenant's alleged anti-social behavior. The landlord failed to provide enough evidence and did not follow the necessary steps outlined in the Residential Tenancies Act.
⚖️ Legal holding
A landlord must provide sufficient evidence and comply with statutory requirements to terminate a tenancy for anti-social behaviour.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal dismissed the landlord's application for termination of the tenancy for anti-social behaviour.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tenancy Tribunal dismissed the landlord's application for termination of the tenancy for anti-social behaviour due to insufficient evidence and non-compliance with statutory requirements.
📚 Full judgment Official document
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5240731 1
[2025] NZTT 5240731
TENANCY TRIBUNAL AT REMOTE LOCATION | TE TARAIPIUNARA RETIHANGA
APPLICANT: [redacted]
Landlord
RESPONDENT: [redacted]
Tenant
TENANCY ADDRESS: [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
ORDER
1. The application is dismissed.
Reasons:
1. Both parties attended the hearing by video.
2. The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy for anti-social behaviour.
3. The applicant is required to establish the claim to the civil law standard of proof, on the balance of probabilities.
4. The applicant claimed the tenant had engaged in the following behaviour:
a) Serious arguments;
b) Session of very loud arguments; and
c) Continual door slamming, yelling, using the carport area not included in the tenancy and smoking in the carport.
5. In support of that claim, the following evidence was produced. Emails sent to the tenant and emails and text messages between the upstairs tenant and the landlord.
6. Section 55A(2) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 provides,
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5240731 2
The Tribunal must (subject to subsection (3)) make the order if satisfied that—
(a) on 3 separate occasions within a 90-day period the tenant, or a person in the premises with the tenant’s permission (other than the landlord or a person acting on the landlord’s behalf or with the landlord’s authority), engaged in anti-social behaviour in connection with the tenancy; and
(b) on each occasion the landlord gave the tenant written notice—
(i) describing clearly which specific behaviour was considered to be anti- social and (if known to the landlord) who engaged in it; and
(ii) advising the tenant of the date, approximate time, and location of the behaviour; and
(iii) stating how many other notices (if any) the landlord has given the tenant under this paragraph in connection with the same tenancy and the same 90-day period; and
(iv) advising the tenant of the tenant’s right to make an application to the Tribunal challenging the notice (see sections 77(1) and 78(1)(a) regarding the Tribunal).
7. Section 55A(7) sets out that anti-social means,
(a) harassment; or
(b) any other act or omission (whether intentional or not), if the act or omission reasonably causes alarm, distress, or nuisance that is more than minor.
8. The landlord sent three emails to the tenant which he considers to be notices as required by section 55A(2). The first email was sent at 9.36am on 7 April 2025. The second email was sent at 10.22am on 7 April 2025. The third email was sent on 17 April 2025.
9. I am not satisfied that the emails comply with the requirements set out in section 55A(2). The emails do not provide sufficient detail of the specific behaviour or the date and approximate time of the behaviour. In addition, there is no advice provided to the tenant of her right to make an application to the Tribunal challenging the notice.
10. As well as the notices not complying, I am not satisfied that all the behaviour complained of amounts to anti-social behaviour. For example, slamming doors is not anti-social behaviour.
11. The neighbours had complained to the landlord about the behaviour but there were no complaints to the Police or noise control.
12. On the evidence before me the landlord has not provided sufficient evidence for a termination order due to anti-social behaviour. The application is dismissed.
https://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1986/0120/latest/link.aspx?id=DLM95578#DLM95578 https://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1986/0120/latest/link.aspx?id=DLM95578#DLM95578 https://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1986/0120/latest/link.aspx?id=DLM95580#DLM95580
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5240731 3
[NAME]
07 May 2025
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5240731 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/
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5240731 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's emails failed to include the date and approximate time of the alleged anti-social behavior.
- The landlord's notices were insufficient because they did not inform the tenant of their right to challenge the notice with the Tribunal.
- The landlord did not provide enough evidence to prove that all the complained-about actions were actually anti-social behavior.
- The landlord failed to provide sufficient evidence for a termination order based on anti-social behavior.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The landlord's claim that door slamming was anti-social behavior was rejected by the Tribunal.
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 landlord's application to terminate the tenancy for anti-social behavior.
What was the dispute about?
The landlord wanted to end the tenancy because of the tenant's alleged anti-social behavior, such as loud arguments and door slamming.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided to dismiss the application because the landlord did not provide sufficient evidence and did not follow the proper procedures outlined in the Residential Tenancies Act.
Which laws or rules were applied?
Section 55A of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 was applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The most important argument was that the landlord did not provide sufficient evidence and did not follow the proper procedures outlined in the Residential Tenancies Act.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was against the landlord who brought the case.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
For landlords seeking to terminate a tenancy for anti-social behavior, it is crucial to provide sufficient evidence and follow the proper procedures outlined in the Residential Tenancies Act.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The emails sent by the landlord to the tenant and emails and text messages between the upstairs tenant and the landlord were considered, but they were deemed insufficient.