VadeLab
OtherTenancy Tribunal·

Tenancy Tribunal Issues Corrigendum Correcting Gender Error

Case No. [2026] NZTT 5067855 · Adjudicator J Greene

📌 In brief

In this case, the Tenancy Tribunal corrected an error from a previous order where they mistakenly referred to Judge Sharp with male pronouns. This corrigendum ensures that all references accurately reflect the gender of the judge involved in the proceedings.

⚖️ Legal holding

The Tribunal corrects an error in referring to Judge Sharp's gender in a previous order.

Topics

corrigendumgender

📖 Technical summary

A correction to a previous order regarding the gender of Judge Sharp.

📜 Headnote Official document

The Tenancy Tribunal at Christchurch issued a corrigendum to correct an error in referring to Judge Sharp's gender as 'His Honour' instead of the accurate 'Her Honour'. The decision was made to ensure accuracy and respect for the judge.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Other

__________________________________________________________________________________ 5067855 1

[2026] NZTT 5067855

TENANCY TRIBUNAL AT CHRISTCHURCH | TE TARAIPIUNARA RETIHANGA KI ŌTAUTAHI

APPLICANT: [redacted]

Tenant

RESPONDENT: [redacted]

Landlord

TENANCY ADDRESS: Room 19, [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Corrigendum

1. The references to His Honour Judge Sharp in the Tribunal’s order dated 2 June 2026 are corrected to read Her Honour Judge Sharp.

Reasons:

1. In the Tribunal’s order dated 2 June 2026 I referred to His Honour Judge Sharp. That was an error. This corrigendum corrects the error. The reference to Judge Sharp is to Her Honour Judge Sharp.

J Greene

03 June 2026

__________________________________________________________________________________ 5067855 2

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 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/

__________________________________________________________________________________ 5067855 3

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:

📊 How courts decide similar cases

Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:

A snapshot of this collection — not a prediction of your case's outcome.

⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this

✅ Tends to be accepted

  • Tenant fails to pay rent for at least 21 days.
  • Tenant is responsible for compensating landlord for damages incurred during tenancy.
  • Tenant must comply with payment obligations or face termination of tenancy.
  • Tenant required to comply with correctly served notices of rent increases under the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
  • Tenant liable for rent arrears when at least 21 days overdue upon filing of a termination application.

❌ Tends to be rejected

  • Tenant fails to attend a scheduled hearing without evidence of a previous hearing or settlement.
  • Tenant required to attend scheduled Case Management Conferences and comply with Tribunal directions.

Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The Tenancy Tribunal issued a correction to an error made in referring to Judge Sharp's gender.

Who was involved?

A tenant and landlord were involved, but the main focus is on correcting an error regarding Judge Sharp's title.

How did the court decide, and why?

The Tribunal issued a corrigendum to correct an error in referring to Judge Sharp as 'His Honour' instead of 'Her Honour'. This was done to ensure accuracy and respect for the judge.

Which laws or rules were applied?

No specific laws or rules were applied, this is purely a procedural correction.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The argument centered on correcting an error in referring to Judge Sharp's gender.

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

This decision does not favour either party as it is purely a procedural correction.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

If there is an error in a previous order, parties can request a corrigendum to correct such errors.

What evidence or documents mattered?

No specific evidence or documents were involved; the decision was based on correcting a clerical error.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

This type of procedural correction is unlikely to be appealable as it does not affect substantive rights.

Is it worth getting a lawyer for a case like this?

For such minor corrections, legal advice may not be necessary unless the error impacts significant rights or interests.

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.