VadeLab
DismissedTenancy Tribunal·

Tenant's Rehearing Request Denied by Tenancy Tribunal

Case No.

📌 In brief

The Tenancy Tribunal denied a tenant's request for a rehearing because the tenant failed to attend the initial hearing due to personal oversight, which did not meet the criteria for a substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant cannot obtain a rehearing based solely on failure to attend a hearing due to personal oversight.

Topics

tenancy disputesrehearing requests

Provisions

📖 What the law says

Residential Tenancies Act 1986 s.105

This section allows the Tenancy Tribunal to order a rehearing if a significant mistake or unfair outcome has happened, or is likely to happen. A request for a rehearing must be made 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 claimant's request for a rehearing was denied due to insufficient evidence of a miscarriage of justice.

📜 Headnote Official document

The Tenancy Tribunal denied a tenant's request for a rehearing, ruling that the tenant's failure to attend the initial hearing due to personal oversight did not constitute a substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice.

📚 Full judgment Official document

__________________________________________________________________________________ 5067855 1

[2025] NZTT 5067855

TENANCY TRIBUNAL AT REMOTE LOCATION | TE TARAIPIUNARA RETIHANGA

APPLICANT: [redacted]

Tenant

RESPONDENT: [redacted]

Landlord

TENANCY ADDRESS: Room 19, [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

ORDER

1. The application for rehearing is dismissed.

Reasons:

1. Both parties attended the hearing.

2. On 14 March 2025 the Tribunal made an order dismissing [NAME]’s application for compensation on the grounds his boarding house tenancy had been terminated without grounds.

3. On 19 March 2025 [NAME] applied for a rehearing on the grounds that he had not been able to join the video link and had his phone on silent so did not answer the calls made to his cell phone.e

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

__________________________________________________________________________________ 5067855 2

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.

8. [NAME] received the notice of hearing; it clearly provides the link to the meeting as a hyperlink. The notice of hearing also states that the Tribunal will call on the number provided if the video meeting link does not work (for whatever reason).

9. The fact [NAME] has not carefully read that notice and therefore failed to attend, is not grounds for rehearing. [NAME] said he had not attended a Tribunal video meeting previously and that he did not find the notice of hearing in any way ambiguous or difficult to understand.

10. In addition, the Tribunal order clearly states that the notice terminating the boarding house tenancy, complies with all the requirements of s 66 (U) (2). There is therefore very little prospect of the claim succeeding substantially.

[NAME]

03 June 2025

__________________________________________________________________________________ 5067855 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/

__________________________________________________________________________________ 5067855 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 tenant received the notice of hearing which included clear instructions.

❌ Tends to be rejected

  • The tenant failed to attend the hearing due to personal oversight.
  • The tenant did not provide evidence of a substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice.
  • The tenant did not show that the Tribunal's procedure went wrong.
  • The tenant did not present new evidence that was not reasonably available at the first hearing.

Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The Tenancy Tribunal denied the tenant's request for a rehearing.

What was the dispute about?

The dispute was about whether the tenant's failure to attend the initial hearing due to personal oversight constituted a substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided to deny the request because the tenant's failure to attend the hearing was due to personal oversight and did not meet the criteria for a substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice.

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 that the tenant's failure to attend the hearing was due to personal oversight and did not constitute 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 carefully read and follow all notices related to hearings to avoid missing important proceedings.

What evidence or documents mattered?

The evidence that mattered was the notice of hearing sent to the tenant, which included clear instructions on how to join the hearing.

Official source: Tenancy Tribunal headnote and full judgment reproduced from the court's public records. View on the official source ↗Summary, holding, technical summary and questions: produced by Artificial Intelligence based on the official headnote and judgment. These are VadeLab’s own material and are not the work of the Court.This decision was issued by the Tenancy Tribunal and is reproduced from its published records. VadeLab is not affiliated with, and this page is not endorsed by, that court or tribunal.