Tenancy Tribunal dismisses third-party dispute application

__________________________________________________________________________________ 5433348 1

[2026] NZTT 5433348

TENANCY TRIBUNAL AT [Event location suppressed]

APPLICANT: [redacted]

Landlord

RESPONDENT: [redacted]

Tenant

[Additional Respondents]

Additional Respondents

TENANCY ADDRESS: [Tenancy address suppressed]

ORDER

1. The application is dismissed.

2. The merits of the claims have not been considered. Dismissal of this application does not prevent the applicant pursuing the claims through a correctly brought application.

3. For that same reason an Order is made suppressing all parties’ names and identifying details.

Reasons:

1. Both parties attended the hearing which was held by video/ teleconference.

2. The Applicant was represented by one of its directors, [The landlord’s representative].

3. The tenant did not appear.

__________________________________________________________________________________ 5433348 2

4. The additional respondents, were represented by [the additional respondents’ representative].

5. [Third party representative] (representing a water meter provider) also attended but was given leave not to participate as this was primarily a jurisdictional case conference.

Purpose of Hearing

6. This hearing was allocated as a case conference to first look at jurisdictional issues and subject to findings on that issue, to prepare the matter for hearing.

7. Submissions on those matters were provided by [the additional respondents’ representative] for the conference.

The Application

8. The application is framed as an application to determine a dispute between a landlord and a tenant under the Residential Tenancies Act (“RTA”). The Tribunal has jurisdiction to determine such disputes. That jurisdiction is limited to disputes between a landlord and a tenant or [NAME_1], relating to a tenancy to which the RTA applies.1

9. It is apparent that while the apartment is rented out, there is no dispute between the applicant and its tenant.

10. The dispute is between the applicant as [NAME_2] and the additional respondents as parties who it is claimed have obligations to it under the [NAME_2] Titles Act (“UTA”).

11. The applicant is correct that the Tribunal has jurisdiction to determine [NAME_2] title disputes.2 That jurisdiction extends to determining disputes arising between any of the various persons listed in s.171(2). It does not follow that any one of those named parties may pursue any claim against any other. There needs to be a relationship of obligation between the parties giving rise to a cause of action if a breach is claimed.

12. The applicant is also correct that the outcome of the disputes may have implications for its relationship with its tenant, for instance by having a metered water supply so the tenant’s water usage can be accurately measured for the purposes of s.39 RTA.

13. Applications made under the RTA and those made under the UTA are separately administered and case managed. They relate to different Tribunal

1 S.77(1) RTA 2 S.171 RTA

__________________________________________________________________________________ 5433348 3

jurisdictions. It is not appropriate for the Tribunal to hear this application as if it had been correctly brought. A new application, properly brought under the UTA, will be required.

14. If such an application is filed, it should be allocated a case conference before me to assess its readiness for hearing.

Directions

15. Because this application is dismissed, there is a limit to the directions the Tribunal can make in respect of an application yet to be filed.

16. Because of the cost implications, I do make the following comments:

a. it appears that the claims brought through this application have been considered by the Tenancy Services Compliance and Investigations team. Its report dated 4 July 2025 finds no breaches.

b. [The additional respondents’ representative]’s submissions for the case conference address in detail the procedural and substantive response by the additional respondents to the claims.

17. So that those obvious issues can be addressed at the outset, any new application filed by the applicant should:

a. clearly identify the basis upon which a direct obligation is owed to the [NAME_2] by each of the named respondents (for instance it would be unusual for the Body Corporate chairperson as opposed to the Body Corporate itself to be a party to the dispute);

b. contain a clear statement about the basis on which the findings of the Investigations Team report are challenged; and

c. respond to [The additional respondents’ representative]’s submissions.

B King 29 April 2026

__________________________________________________________________________________ 5433348 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, or the failure to make an order, where the amount in dispute on appeal is

less than $1000 • a final order to undertake work, or the failure to make an order, where the value of the

work in dispute on appeal is 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 [NAME_3]/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 [NAME_3]/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.[NAME_3]/disputes/enforcing-decisions https://www.[NAME_3]/disputes/enforcing-decisions http://www.[NAME_3]/disputes/enforcing-decisions/

__________________________________________________________________________________ 5433348 5

A manaomia nisi faamatalaga poo se fesoasoani, e uiga i lau mataupu, asiasi ifo le matou aupega tafailagi: [NAME_3]/disputes/enforcing-decisions, pe fesootai mai le Tenancy Services i le numera [PHONE].

Reasons: