Tenant's Rehearing Application Dismissed by Tenancy Tribunal
📌 In brief
The Tenancy Tribunal dismissed a tenant's request for a rehearing because the tenant did not provide sufficient evidence to prove a substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant must demonstrate a substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice to obtain a rehearing.
📖 What the law says
This section gives the Tenancy Tribunal the power to order a rehearing of a case. A rehearing can be ordered if a significant mistake or unfair outcome has happened or is likely to happen. An application for a rehearing must be submitted within 5 working days of the decision, though the Tribunal can allow more time.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a lawyer.
📖 Technical summary
The Tenancy Tribunal dismissed the claimant's application for rehearing due to insufficient grounds.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tenancy Tribunal dismissed a tenant's application for rehearing due to insufficient grounds, emphasising the importance of demonstrating a substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice.
📚 Full judgment Official document
__________________________________________________________________________________ 4998868 1
[2025] NZTT 4998868, 4962034
TENANCY TRIBUNAL AT AUCKLAND | TE TARAIPIUNARA RETIHANGA KI TĀMAKI MAKAURAU
APPLICANT: [redacted]
Tenant
RESPONDENT: [redacted]
Landlord
TENANCY ADDRESS: [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
ORDER
1. The application for rehearing is dismissed.
Reasons:
1. Both parties attended the re hearing application hearing.
2. On 17 December 2024, the Tribunal made an order for rent arrears, reimbursement of filing fee and dismissing the tenants’ claims.
3. On 9 January 2025, [NAME] applied for a rehearing on the following grounds:
- One of his submissions was not present at the hearing,
- He did not have full “disclosure” of the landlords’ documents,
- He didn’t understand how the Tribunal worked and what was required of him,
- That the landlord lied to the Tribunal,
- Evidence about an expert opinion was not submitted,
- Correspondence about house inspections were omitted.
__________________________________________________________________________________ 4998868 2
4. 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”.
5. 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.
6. 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?
7. For the following reasons [NAME] has failed to establish the grounds for a rehearing.
Missing submissions:
8. The submissions that [NAME] claims were missing was in fact before the Tribunal. I referred to the document at length during the hearing and in my order.
Did not have full disclosure:
9. [NAME] accepts that all the landlord documents where probably on the Tenancy Tribunal “portal.” However, [NAME] said he had technology issues and could not access the landlord documents.
10. All documents were disclosure to [NAME].
11. The landlord documents relate solely to their claim for rent arrears and not documents relating to the tenants’ claims. For completeness I will itemise all the documents under the landlord’s application:
- Numerous notices of hearing (mediation and Tribunal)
- Tenancy Agreement and Tenancy Tribunal application
- Rent summary.
- Photos of the property taken at the time the landlords purchased the property a year or two before.
- Statutory Declaration from previous tenant.
- Tribunal Orders.
__________________________________________________________________________________ 4998868 3
Did not understand how the Tribunal worked and what was required of him:
12. The Tenancy Tribunal is considered a lay jurisdiction, meaning that it is not a traditional court and typically does not require legal representation. The Tribunal allows individuals to represent themselves in disputes between tenants and landlords. The hearings are conducted in a more informal manner.
13. The tenant said he sought a lot of advice from Tenancy Services, and informal advice channels in the community. He was of the view that Tenancy Services were of no or very little use in providing him with assistance on progressing his claims.
14. It is of note that the tenant was able to present a comprehensive and detailed 60-page document for the Tribunal.
15. It is for the applicant to provide the evidence and support for their claims. This is called the onus of proof. That onus rests on the person making the claim.
The landlord lied:
16. It is the adjudicator that had the burden of assessing what information they accept or reject. The tenant claims that the landlord painted the house before the tenancy started to hide the mould issues.
17. At the hearing, the landlord claimed he had not painted the house but that it was done prior to when he purchased the property a year earlier.
18. I do not need to consider whether the landlord lied or not, as that statement was not something that influenced by determination of the alleged mould issues.
Expert Evidence not submitted:
19. The tenant is referring to claims made by the landlord that he had a builder come and assess the under house for the purpose of a moisture barrier installation.
20. The landlord said the builder said it was too shallow and there was not enough room to install a moisture barrier.
21. The tenant responded that he had installed hundreds of moisture barriers and he said there was enough room. This point was discussed at length. The claim of expertise by [NAME] was equally not supported by evidence at the hearing.
22. The tenant provided photos of the under house and showed where there was a moisture barrier for most of the underneath up until the lower level of the under house.
23. Neither party provided evidence to support or refute their statements regarding the moisture barrier and potential installation.
Correspondence about house inspections were omitted:
__________________________________________________________________________________ 4998868 4
24. This was not part of the landlord claim. Therefore, it is for the tenant to raise this inspection reports if he wants to rely on them at the hearing.
25. Tenants are permitted to obtain this information about their tenancy from the landlord. At no point did the tenant say he had sought these documents and the landlord had refused to provide them.
26. For all the above reasons I am dismissing the rehearing application.
27. My order of 17 December 2024 stands and is enforceable.
[NAME]
13 March 2025
__________________________________________________________________________________ 4998868 5
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/
__________________________________________________________________________________ 4998868 6
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 did not need to consider if the landlord lied about painting the house, as it did not influence the determination of mould issues.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The tenant's argument that a submission was missing was not accepted.
- The tenant's argument that he did not have full "disclosure" of the landlord's documents was not accepted.
- The tenant's argument that he did not understand how the Tribunal worked and what was required of him was not accepted.
- The tenant's argument that the landlord lied to the Tribunal was not accepted as relevant to the mould issue determination.
- The tenant's argument about expert opinion not being submitted was not accepted because neither party provided evidence to support their statements.
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 rehearing.
What was the dispute about?
The tenant requested a rehearing claiming that certain submissions were missing, he did not fully understand the process, and the landlord lied to the Tribunal.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided that the tenant failed to establish the grounds for a rehearing, as the submissions were present, the tenant had access to the landlord's documents, and the tenant's claims lacked supporting evidence.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Residential Tenancies Act 1986, section 105(1) was applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was the tenant's failure to demonstrate a substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice.
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 have strong evidence and a clear understanding of the process before applying for a rehearing.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The judgment mentions the presence of submissions, the availability of landlord documents, and the lack of supporting evidence for the tenant's claims.