Tenant's Notice to End Tenancy Upheld by Tenancy Tribunal
📌 In brief
The Tenancy Tribunal upheld a tenant's notice to end a periodic tenancy on 31 March 2025. The landlord argued for an extension but failed to provide evidence of such an agreement.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant is entitled to terminate a periodic tenancy by giving 28 days' notice.
📖 What the law says
This section sets out the minimum notice periods a landlord must give to end a tenancy. For example, if the landlord needs the property for themselves or a family member, they must give 42 days' notice. If the property is for an employee and this was stated in the tenancy agreement, 42 days' notice is also required.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a lawyer.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal ruled that the tenancy ends on 31 March 2025 as per the tenant's notice.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tenancy Tribunal upheld a tenant's notice to end a periodic tenancy on 31 March 2025, rejecting the landlord's claim for an extension. The decision was based on the lack of evidence showing an agreement to extend the tenancy date.
📚 Full judgment Official document
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5192754 1
[2025] NZTT 5192754
TENANCY TRIBUNAL AT [Event location suppressed]
APPLICANT: [redacted]
Tenant
RESPONDENT: [redacted]
Landlord
TENANCY ADDRESS: [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
AMENDED ORDER
1. This order amends and replaces the order made by the Tribunal on 25 March 2025 by changing the amount of the filing fee to be reimbursed by the landlord to the tenant. The incorrect amount was entered by the Tribunal’s system and is now corrected. In all other respects the Order is unchanged.
2. The tenancy is to end on 31 March 2025 as provided in the tenant’s notice of termination.
3. The landlord must reimburse the tenant $27.00 for the filing fee.
4. The tenant’s name and identifying details are suppressed.
Reasons:
1. Both parties attended the hearing by telephone.
2. The landlord had requested an adjournment because she alleged the tenant had threatened the landlord to withdraw its application or they would damage the property and she did not wish to attend the hearing in these circumstances.
3. The Tribunal determined that the hearing would proceed because:
a. The landlord has no application before the Tribunal to withdraw.
b. The tenant’s application is urgent and straightforward.
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5192754 2
c. The hearing was by telephone and so there was no suggestion of intimidation arising.
d. Alleged threats without compelling evidence in these circumstances are not grounds to adjourn an urgent hearing.
The tenant’s claim
4. The tenant’s application was for a determination that the tenancy will end on 31 March 2025.
5. The landlord contended that the tenant was liable for rent until a new tenant was found because the tenant had agreed to extend the tenancy until the end of April 2025.
6. In considering the tenant’s claim, the standard of proof is “on the balance of probabilities”. In other words, the tenant must establish with evidence that their claim is more likely than not. The tenant’s claim has been considered bearing in mind the standard of proof required.
7. Contemporaneous documents such as emails and texts are often helpful in making factual findings, especially where facts are disputed or there are gaps in the recollection of the parties.
8. While this decision has not referred to all the evidence presented at the hearing, the parties can be assured that it has all been considered. In the interests of conciseness, only the most relevant or important evidence has been referred to in this Order. Any evidence that was not directly relevant to proving a claim that was part of the application has been omitted.
Evidence
9. The tenant provided the following evidence:
a. The tenancy was a fixed term tenancy from 28 June 2023 to 25 September 2024. The tenancy became a periodic tenancy from that date and no further fixed term tenancy agreement was entered into by the parties.
b. To keep the landlord informed of their intentions, on 13 December 2024 the tenant texted the landlord to advise that they were considering their options but were considering ending the tenancy on either on 31 March 2025 or on a date in July 2025 to be confirmed.
c. The tenant texted the landlord on 1 January 2025 to advise “We won’t be leaving in March now, will be end of April/May”.
d. Due to changes in their employment situation and with their flatmates moving out, the tenant gave the landlord formal notice on 23 February 2025 that they were terminating the tenancy on 31 March 2025.
e. On 6 March 2025 the tenant contacted the landlord to see if they could continue the tenancy for a period after 31 March 2025.
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5192754 3
f. The landlord enquired by text on 7 March 2025 to see if the tenant wished to remain in the property to 30 June 2025.
g. The next day on 8 March 2025 the tenant confirmed by text that they would be leaving on 31 March 2025 in accordance with their notice.
10. The landlord agreed with the tenant’s evidence which was supported by copies of the text correspondence between the parties. The landlord explained that she was confused by the request to extend the end of the tenancy and believes that the parties’ agreed to end the tenancy in April 2025. She did not supply any evidence such as a text or email exchange confirming that agreement had been reached on extending the date.
Discussion and decision
11. Once the fixed term ended, the tenancy became a periodic tenancy. See section 60A Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”).
12. The tenant was entitled to terminate the tenancy by giving 28-days’ notice. See section 51(2A) RTA.
13. Both parties accept that such notice was given for the tenancy to end on 31 March 2025. Extending the termination date beyond 31 March 2025 required the agreement of both parties.
14. While the tenant made enquiries about extending the termination date, there is no evidence before the Tribunal that the parties came to an agreement to extend the date.
15. The Tribunal is persuaded on the balance of probabilities and on the evidence before it that the tenancy is to end on 31 March 2025 as provided in the tenant’s notice of termination.
16. Because [The applicant/s] have wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.
[NAME] 26 March 2025
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5192754 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/
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5192754 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 provided clear notice to terminate the tenancy on 31 March 2025.
- The landlord did not provide any evidence to support their claim of an extension agreement.
- The Tribunal considered contemporaneous text messages as reliable evidence.
- The landlord's confusion about the extension request was not backed by concrete evidence.
- The standard of proof ("on the balance of probabilities") was met by the tenant's evidence.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The landlord suggested the parties had agreed to extend the tenancy until the end of April 2025.
- The landlord's request for an adjournment due to alleged threats was dismissed by the Tribunal.
- The landlord's confusion was not sufficient to overturn the tenant's clear notice of termination.
- The landlord did not provide any text or email exchanges confirming the alleged agreement.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The Tenancy Tribunal decided that the tenancy will end on 31 March 2025 as per the tenant's notice.
What was the dispute about?
The dispute was about whether the tenancy should end on 31 March 2025 or be extended until the end of April 2025.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided that the tenancy ends on 31 March 2025 because there was no evidence of an agreement to extend the tenancy.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Residential Tenancies Act 1986, sections 51(2A) and 60A were applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The most critical argument was the lack of evidence showing an agreement to extend the tenancy date.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was for the tenant who brought the case.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation should ensure they have clear evidence of any agreements to extend a tenancy.
What evidence or documents mattered?
Text messages exchanged between the tenant and landlord were crucial in making the decision.