Tenant Entitled to Uphold Previous Rulings in Tenancy Dispute
📌 In brief
In a recent Tenancy Tribunal case, the landlord's claims for damage and cleaning costs were dismissed, upholding a previous ruling. However, the Tribunal awarded the landlord $244.42 for the cost of rubbish removal and filing fees, finding that the tenant breached their obligation to remove all rubbish upon termination of the tenancy.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant is entitled to have previous rulings upheld unless new evidence or substantial wrong is proven.
📖 What the law says
This rule allows a tenant to ask the Tenancy Tribunal to cancel a notice from their landlord ending the tenancy. The tenant must apply within 14 working days if they believe the landlord gave the notice because the tenant used their rights or complained about the tenancy.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a lawyer.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal dismissed the landlord's claims for damage and cleaning costs, upholding a previous ruling.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tenancy Tribunal dismissed the landlord's claims for damage and cleaning costs, upholding a previous ruling. The Tribunal found that the tenant breached their obligation to remove all rubbish upon termination of the tenancy, awarding the landlord $244.42 for the cost of rubbish removal and filing fees.
📚 Full judgment Official document
__________________________________________________________________________________ 4973573 1
[2025] NZTT 4973573
TENANCY TRIBUNAL - [Event location suppressed]
APPLICANT: [redacted]
Landlord
RESPONDENT: [redacted]
Tenant
TENANCY ADDRESS: [Tenancy address suppressed]
ORDER
1. The Tribunal orders continued suppression of the parties’ names and identifying details.
2. [The tenant/s] must pay [The landlord/s] $244.42 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below.
Description Landlord Tenant Rubbish removal $217.42 Filing fee reimbursement $27.00 Total award $244.42 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord $244.42
3. The landlord’s other applications are dismissed.
Reasons:
1. The landlord and [the landlord/s partner] attended the hearing.
2. The tenant did not attend but provided submissions.
3. As with previous applications, this application names [The landlord/s] as the landlords with [the tenant/s] as tenants. As noted in previous Orders, the landlord and tenant are the only parties to the tenancy agreement.
__________________________________________________________________________________ 4973573 2
Background
4. Cross applications between the parties were determined by an Order of the Tribunal dated 5 April 2024.
5. The landlord applied for a rehearing of that Order. A teleconference hearing which the parties attended, was held to determine whether a rehearing should be granted. In an Order dated 11 July 2024 the landlord’s application for a rehearing was declined, for the reasons set out in that Order.
6. The landlord now brings this application which in almost all respects is a resubmission of the claims determined in the 5 April 2024 Order.
7. As explained to the landlord at the hearing, if claims have been determined and are the subject of an existing Tribunal Order, they cannot be considered again just because a new application has been filed.
8. I must therefore dismiss the claims that have already been considered and determined by the 5 April 2024 Order. That includes all the landlord’s claims for damage and cleaning costs.
9. This application includes a claim that the tenant breached a termination agreement by moving out without giving 21 days’ notice. The finding in the 5 April 2024 Order was that the tenancy had been terminated, unlawfully, by notice from the landlord.
10. That is an existing finding that is inconsistent with the landlord’s claim, which must therefore be dismissed.
11. Included in this application is a claim for compensation for the cost of purchasing a flexibin and having it collected, to remove rubbish left by the tenant. I questioned the landlord about the need for such a large bin to have been arranged, given the quantity of rubbish left as shown in the photos. The landlord has given evidence that the bin was only used for rubbish left by the tenant and the weight of the rubbish, which included a car door, as well as the bulk of it, meant that a large bin was needed.
12. I find it proved on balance that the tenant breached his obligation under s.40(1)(d) to remove all rubbish from the premises on termination of the tenancy and that the sums claimed represent the loss caused to the landlord by that breach, as proved by the invoices provided.
__________________________________________________________________________________ 4973573 3
13. Because [The landlord/s] has had a claim upheld claim I reimburse the filing fee.
[NAME] 24 February 2025
__________________________________________________________________________________ 4973573 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/
__________________________________________________________________________________ 4973573 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 tenant breached their obligation to remove all rubbish upon termination of the tenancy.
- The landlord's claim for the cost of purchasing a flexibin and having it collected was supported by invoices.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The landlord's request for a rehearing was denied because no substantial wrong or new evidence was presented.
- The landlord's claims for damage and cleaning costs were previously determined and could not be reconsidered.
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 claims for damage and cleaning costs, upholding a previous ruling. The Tribunal awarded the landlord $244.42 for the cost of rubbish removal and filing fees.
What was the dispute about?
The dispute was about the landlord's claims for damage and cleaning costs, as well as the tenant's breach of obligation to remove all rubbish upon termination of the tenancy.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided to dismiss the landlord's claims for damage and cleaning costs, upholding a previous ruling. They awarded the landlord $244.42 for the cost of rubbish removal and filing fees, finding that the tenant breached their obligation to remove all rubbish upon termination of the tenancy.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Residential Tenancies Act 1986, section 54 was applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was that the tenant breached their obligation to remove all rubbish upon termination of the tenancy, leading to the landlord's claim for the cost of rubbish removal and filing fees.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was partly for the landlord, as they were awarded $244.42 for the cost of rubbish removal and filing fees, and partly against the landlord, as their claims for damage and cleaning costs were dismissed.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
For someone in a similar situation, previous rulings can be upheld unless new evidence or substantial wrong is proven. Additionally, tenants must ensure they remove all rubbish upon termination of the tenancy to avoid penalties.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The evidence and documents that mattered included the previous ruling, the cost of rubbish removal, and the filing fees.