Tenant's Application Dismissed for Not Showing Up at Hearing
📌 In brief
In this Tenancy Tribunal case, the tenant's application was dismissed because they failed to show up for the hearing. The Residential Tenancies Act requires tenants to attend hearings or request an adjournment.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant's application is dismissed if they fail to attend the hearing without requesting an adjournment or notifying the settlement.
📖 What the law says
This rule states that if a party is properly notified about a hearing but does not show up, the Tenancy Tribunal has the power to proceed with the case, dismiss it, or postpone it, even without that party present. In this case, the tenant's application was dismissed because they did not attend their hearing.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a lawyer.
📖 Technical summary
The claimant's application was dismissed for failure to attend the hearing.
📜 Headnote Official document
In a Tenancy Tribunal case, the tenant's application was dismissed because they did not attend the hearing as required by the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
📚 Full judgment Official document
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5117311 1
[2025] NZTT 5117311, 5076409
TENANCY TRIBUNAL AT TOKOROA | TE TARAIPIUNARA RETIHANGA KI TOKOROA
APPLICANT/
RESPONDENT:
[redacted]
Tenant
RESPONDENT
/APPLICANT:
[redacted]
Landlords
TENANCY ADDRESS: [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
ORDER
1. The Applicant’s application is dismissed.
2. The Respondent’s application is withdrawn.
Reasons:
1. The Respondent (Landlord) attended the hearing.
2. The Applicant did not attend the hearing at the scheduled time, request an adjournment, or notify the Tribunal the matter has settled. See sections 78(1)(i) and 92(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
3. The Respondent did not want to proceed with their application and considered it was the Applicant who had brought them to the Tribunal.
[NAME]
10 March 2025
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5117311 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 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/
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5117311 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:
⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this
✅ Tends to be accepted
- The landlord attended the hearing.
- The tenant did not attend the hearing at the scheduled time.
- The tenant did not request an adjournment.
- The tenant did not notify the Tribunal that the matter had settled.
- The landlord did not want to proceed with their application.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The tenant's application was dismissed because they did not attend the hearing.
What was the dispute about?
The dispute was about whether the tenant's application should be dismissed for failing to attend the hearing.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided to dismiss the tenant's application because they did not attend the hearing as required by law.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Residential Tenancies Act 1986, sections 78(1)(i) and 92(1) were applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The most important argument was that the tenant did not attend the hearing without requesting an adjournment or notifying the settlement.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was against the tenant who brought the case.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation should ensure they attend all hearings or request an adjournment if they cannot attend.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The judgment does not specify any particular evidence or documents