Tenant's Application Upheld After Mediation
📌 In brief
In this case, the Tenancy Tribunal dismissed one application because the landlord didn't show up for the hearing. However, they upheld a mediated order because both the landlord and tenant had previously agreed to it during a mediation session.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant's application stands if both parties attended mediation and agreed to the mediated order.
📖 Technical summary
The Tenancy Tribunal dismissed one application for lack of prosecution and upheld a mediated order in another.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tenancy Tribunal at Auckland heard two applications involving a landlord and a tenant. One application was dismissed for lack of prosecution, while the other, which related to a mediated order, was upheld as both parties had attended the mediation and agreed to the order.
📚 Full judgment Official document
__________________________________________________________________________________ 4713089 1
[2025] NZTT 4713089, 4768817
TENANCY TRIBUNAL AT AUCKLAND | TE TARAIPIUNARA RETIHANGA KI TĀMAKI MAKAURAU
APPLICANT: [redacted]
Landlord
RESPONDENT: [redacted]
Tenant
TENANCY ADDRESS: [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
ORDER
1. Application 4768817 is dismissed for want of prosecution.
2. Application 4713089 in respect of the mediator’s order dated 10 November 2023 stands and must remain in force.
Reasons:
1. The tenant [NAME] attended the rehearing via teleconference. An attempt to contact the tenant [NAME] was unsuccessful. The landlord also failed to attend the rehearing.
2. The tenant [NAME] filed a rehearing request in respect of both applications. The rehearing request was granted by an earlier adjudicator.
Application 4713089 – Mediator’s Order dated 10 November 2023
3. Application number 4713089 relates to a mediated order dated 10 November 2023. I have sighted the order and can see that both parties attended the mediation and I therefore consider the orders made in this agreement appropriate and accordingly they should remain.
__________________________________________________________________________________ 4713089 2
Application 4768817 – Vacated Compensation:
4. The applicant is required to establish the claim to the civil law standard of proof, on the balance of probabilities.
5. A cornerstone of the hearing process is that the applicant must attend the hearing in support of their application. Ultimately it is for the applicant, in this case the landlord, to prosecute their claim.
6. This is a rehearing and as such I must disregard the previous order as if it never existed. The previous order has been nullified by the granting of the rehearing.
7. The landlord did not attend today’s rehearing and as such, application 4768817 relating to vacated compensation must be dismissed.
8. The bond has already been released pursuant to the mediator’s order dated 10 November 2023.
[NAME]
26 March 2025
__________________________________________________________________________________ 4713089 3
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/
__________________________________________________________________________________ 4713089 4
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 mediator's order for application 4713089 remained in force because both parties attended the mediation and agreed to the orders.
- The tenant's request for a rehearing was granted by an earlier adjudicator.
- The previous order was nullified because a rehearing was granted.
- The bond had already been released according to the mediator's order.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The landlord's application for vacated compensation was dismissed because the landlord did not attend the rehearing.
- The landlord's application 4768817 was dismissed because the landlord failed to prosecute their claim by not attending the hearing.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
One application was dismissed for lack of prosecution, while another mediated order was upheld.
What was the dispute about?
The dispute was about whether a mediated order should be upheld and whether an application should be dismissed for lack of prosecution.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided to uphold the mediated order because both parties had agreed to it, and dismissed the application because the landlord did not attend the hearing.
Which laws or rules were applied?
No specific laws or rules were mentioned in the judgment.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was that both parties had agreed to the mediated order.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was for the tenant who brought the case regarding the mediated order and against the landlord who brought the application for vacated compensation.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation should ensure they attend all hearings and that both parties agree to any mediated orders.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The judgment does not specify any particular evidence or documents that mattered.