Tenant's Rehearing Application Dismissed
📌 In brief
The Tenancy Tribunal dismissed a tenant's application for a rehearing. The tenant argued that he had further evidence and disagreed with the compensation amount awarded for a breach of the Healthy Homes Ventilation Standard. The Tribunal ruled that mere disagreement with the compensation amount does not justify a rehearing.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant cannot obtain a rehearing merely because they disagree with the compensation amount.
📖 What the law says
This section allows the Tenancy Tribunal to order a rehearing if a significant mistake or unfairness has happened or might happen. An application for a rehearing must be submitted within 5 working days of the decision, though the Tribunal can sometimes allow more time.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a lawyer.
📖 Technical summary
The claimant's application for a rehearing was dismissed.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tenancy Tribunal dismissed an application for a rehearing by a tenant who claimed he had further evidence and disagreed with the compensation amount awarded for a breach of the Healthy Homes Ventilation Standard.
📚 Full judgment Official document
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5097868 1
[2025] NZTT 5097868, 5152072
TENANCY TRIBUNAL AT AUCKLAND | TE TARAIPIUNARA RETIHANGA KI TĀMAKI MAKAURAU
APPLICANT: [redacted]
Tenant
RESPONDENT: [redacted]
Landlord
TENANCY ADDRESS: Room 8, [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
ORDER
1. The application for rehearing is dismissed.
2. The Tribunal order dated 10 April 2025 stands.
Reasons:
1. Both parties attended the hearing which took place by video conference on 30 April 2025.
2. On 10 April 2025 the Tribunal made an order that the landlord application 5152072 was withdrawn at the landlord request as it relates to a different room number and ordering that [COMPANY] must pay [NAME] $677.00 being rent credit refund, compensation for breach of Healthy Homes Ventilation Standard and reimbursement of filing fee.
3. On or about 10 April 2025 [NAME] applied for a rehearing on the grounds that he had further evidence he had been unable to present at the previous hearing.
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5097868 2
4. Mr [NAME] stated today that he wished to ensure that the Tribunal understood that when he rented Room 8 he did not know it was not lawfully Healthy Homes compliant. He stated that he did not think that he had clearly conveyed this at the previous hearing and the Tribunal may have thought that he knew it was unlawful when he rented it. Mr [NAME] also stated that he disagreed with the amount of compensation ordered and sought more.
5. Section 105(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 provides that the Tribunal has the power to order a rehearing where “a substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice has or may have occurred or is likely to occur”.
6. Usually the party applying for the rehearing must show that something went wrong with the Tribunal’s procedure, for example, that they did not receive notice of the hearing or they were not able to properly present their case. A rehearing may also be granted where there is new evidence that was not reasonably available at the first hearing, if it could have affected the outcome.
7. The District Court has held that if the Tribunal was simply wrong in its findings of fact, or its application of the law, this is not sufficient to establish a miscarriage of justice: a rehearing is not an alternative to an appeal. Furthermore, a rehearing will not be granted just because a party is unhappy with the decision, or to give them a second opportunity to present their case.
Has a substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice occurred?
8. For the following reasons [NAME] has failed to establish the grounds for a rehearing:
(a)The Tribunal order dated 10 April 2025 found that the landlord had breached the Healthy Homes Ventilation requirement in respect of Room 8. This finding was not based on whether or not the tenant knew of the breach at the beginning of the tenancy but based on the finding that the tenant had proved on the balance of probabilities that the room was not compliant.
(b)I accept that the tenant did not know the room was non compliant at the beginning of the tenancy but find that this would not have affected the outcome.
(c)While the tenant claim partly concerns the further evidence referred to, the core issue is that the tenant disagrees with the amount of compensation ordered. However, that is not a process defect and therefore is not a matter for a rehearing. If the Tribunal is wrong in its decision that is a matter for an appeal.
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5097868 3
9. For the reasons outlined above the tenant has not proved that there has or may have been or is likely to be a substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice. Therefore, there are no grounds for a rehearing under section 105. Accordingly, the application for rehearing is dismissed and the order dated 10 April 2025 stands.
[NAME]
30 April 2025
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5097868 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/
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5097868 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 Tribunal had already found the landlord breached the Healthy Homes Ventilation requirement for Room 8.
- The previous finding was based on the tenant proving the room was not compliant, not on the tenant's knowledge.
- The tenant's lack of knowledge about the room's non-compliance would not have changed the original outcome.
- Disagreeing with the compensation amount is not a procedural defect that warrants a rehearing.
- If the Tribunal made a wrong decision, the proper course of action is an appeal, not a rehearing.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The tenant argued for a rehearing because he had further evidence he could not present at the previous hearing.
- The tenant argued that the Tribunal may have misunderstood his knowledge of the room's non-compliance.
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 tenant's application for a rehearing.
What was the dispute about?
The tenant wanted a rehearing because he believed he had additional evidence and disagreed with the compensation amount awarded for a breach of the Healthy Homes Ventilation Standard.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided to dismiss the application for a rehearing because the tenant's disagreement with the compensation amount did not constitute a substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Residential Tenancies Act 1986, specifically section 105, was applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was that the tenant's disagreement with the compensation amount did not meet the criteria for a rehearing.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was against the tenant who brought the application for a rehearing.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation should understand that a disagreement with the compensation amount alone is not enough to warrant a rehearing.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The judgment does not specify any particular evidence or documents that mattered.