Tenant Ordered to Remove Dog or Face Tenancy Termination
📌 In brief
The Tenancy Tribunal ruled that a tenant must remove a dog from rental property by a specific date or face termination of the tenancy due to a breach of the landlord's no-dog policy.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant must comply with a landlord's no-dog policy or face termination of the tenancy.
📖 What the law says
This section allows the Tenancy Tribunal to end a tenancy if one party breaks the tenancy agreement or the Act. If the problem can be fixed, the party who complained must first give the other party a notice to fix the breach within at least 10 working days.
This section outlines the types of orders the Tenancy Tribunal can make. These include declaring rights or obligations, ordering a party to give possession of premises to another, or ordering a party to pay money.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a lawyer.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal granted a conditional termination order for a tenant's breach of a no-dog policy.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tenancy Tribunal ordered the tenant to remove a dog from the premises by a specified date or face termination of the tenancy due to a breach of the landlord's no-dog policy.
📚 Full judgment Official document
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5178911 1
[2025] NZTT 5178911
TENANCY TRIBUNAL AT REMOTE LOCATION | TE TARAIPIUNARA RETIHANGA
APPLICANT: [redacted]
Landlord
RESPONDENT: [redacted]
Tenant
TENANCY ADDRESS: [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
ORDER
1. [NAME] must permanently remove the dog residing at [ADDRESS], Otara, Auckland no later than midday, Monday 28 April 2025.
2. If the tenant fails to permanently remove the dog from [ADDRESS], Otara, Auckland by midday, Monday 28 April 2025, the tenancy at [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE] will terminate and the landlord will have immediate possession of the premises.
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5178911 2
Reasons:
1. The landlord attended the hearing, conducted via teleconference. Two calls to the tenant went unanswered and to voicemail. After the first call went to voicemail, a brief message was left introducing myself and explaining the purpose of the call. The message concluded with the advice I would try a second time after waiting some minutes. I was satisfied adequate service had completed and I continued with the hearing after the second call also went unanswered.
2. The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy for breach of the tenant’s obligations. A prior attempt to resolve the matter via mediation was unsuccessful.
Should the tenancy be terminated?
3. The Tribunal may terminate a tenancy for breach where, due to the nature or extent of the breach, it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate. See section 56(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
4. Where the breach is capable of remedy the landlord must first serve a notice on the tenant requiring them to remedy the breach within at least 14 days and establish that the tenant has failed to do so.
5. The tenant has breached their obligations by having a dog at the premises without landlord approval as required.
6. The landlord served a notice on the tenant on 28 November 2024, requiting the dog be removed by 18 December 2024. The tenant did not remedy the breach within the required period, and the dog remains at the premises.
7. It would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy because the premises is part of a neighbourhood where the landlord has other properties and has instituted a dog free policy due to historic issues and concerns in the neighbourhood. This condition was clearly signalled prior to the tenant accepting this tenancy but the tenant assured the landlord a dog would not reside. This assurance was not met.
8. The result is unfortunate as I understand alternative premises, more suitable, may have been offered as an alternative.
Should a conditional termination order be made?
9. The Tribunal may terminate a tenancy for breach where, due to the nature or extent of the breach, it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate. Where the breach is capable of remedy the landlord must first serve a notice on the tenant requiring them to remedy the breach within at least 14 days, and establish that
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5178911 3
the tenant has failed to do so. See section 56(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. That sequence has completed here.
10. Given the circumstances, I have granted a conditional termination as an alternative to a termination order today. See section 78(3) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. It is hoped the tenant will be able to rehome the dog so the tenancy can continue. The success of that lies with the tenant.
11. The conditional termination order will lapse if it is fully complied with. If the tenant breaches the order, the possession order is enforceable for 90 days from the first breach. See section 64(4)(b) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
M Brennan
10 April 2025
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5178911 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/
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5178911 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 served a notice requiring the tenant to remove the dog within 14 days.
- The tenant did not comply with the notice to remove the dog.
- The premises are part of a neighborhood with a no-dog policy due to historical issues.
- The no-dog policy was clearly communicated before the tenant accepted the tenancy.
- The tenant assured the landlord a dog would not reside at the premises, which was not honored.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The tenant's assurance of not keeping a dog was not met, leading to inequity.
- The Tribunal considered the unfortunate situation but still deemed termination equitable.
- The conditional termination order allows the tenant to keep the tenancy if they can rehome the dog.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The tenant must remove the dog from the rental property by a specified date or face termination of the tenancy.
What was the dispute about?
The dispute was about whether the tenant could keep a dog at the rental property despite the landlord's no-dog policy.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided that the tenant must remove the dog because the breach of the no-dog policy was inequitable and the tenant failed to remedy the breach within the required period.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Residential Tenancies Act 1986, sections 56(1) and 78(3) were applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was that the premises is part of a neighbourhood where the landlord has instituted a dog-free policy due to historic issues and concerns.
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 in a similar situation should ensure they comply with the landlord's policies to avoid termination of the tenancy.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The evidence included the landlord serving a notice requiring the dog to be removed and the fact that the tenant did not remedy the breach within the required period.