Tenant's Request to End Fixed-Term Tenancy Early Rejected by Tenancy Tribunal
📌 In brief
The Tenancy Tribunal denied a tenant's request to end their fixed-term tenancy early, stating that the tenant did not show sufficient hardship to justify the termination.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant cannot terminate a fixed-term tenancy early unless they can prove severe hardship and that their hardship outweighs the hardship to the landlord if the term is reduced.
📖 What the law says
This rule allows the Tenancy Tribunal to shorten a fixed-term tenancy if a tenant applies and can show that an unexpected change in their situation would cause them severe hardship. The Tribunal must also be convinced that the tenant's hardship if the tenancy continues would be worse than the landlord's hardship if the tenancy is shortened.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a lawyer.
📖 Technical summary
The claimant sought to terminate a fixed-term tenancy early due to unforeseen changes in circumstances but failed to meet the criteria set by the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tenancy Tribunal dismissed a tenant's application to terminate a fixed-term tenancy early, ruling that the tenant failed to demonstrate an unforeseen change in circumstances leading to severe hardship.
📚 Full judgment Official document
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5166434 1
[2025] NZTT 5166434
TENANCY TRIBUNAL AT REMOTE LOCATION | TE TARAIPIUNARA RETIHANGA
APPLICANT: [redacted]
Tenant
RESPONDENT: [redacted]
Landlord
TENANCY ADDRESS: [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
ORDER
1. The application is dismissed.
Reasons:
1. Both parties attended the hearing.
2. The tenant has applied for reduction of the fixed-term tenancy due to end on 4 February 2026.
3. The Tribunal may reduce a fixed term tenancy where:
a. there has been an unforeseen change in the applicant’s circumstances; and
b. there would be severe hardship to the applicant if the term is not reduced; and
c. the applicant’s hardship would be greater than the hardship to the other party if the term is reduced. See section 66(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Background
4. [NAME] and a co-tenant originally rented the premises for a fixed term. Prior to expiry of the term, the parties agreed to enter a further fixed term commencing on 6 February 2025 and ending on 4 February 2026 . [NAME]
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5166434 2
prepared and signed a new tenancy agreement on 2 January 2025 and emailed it to the tenants for signing on 3 January 2025.
5. On 4 January 2025, before signing the new tenancy agreement, [NAME] sent [NAME] an email on behalf of his co-tenant. He explained that the co-tenant was unable to access emails nor a printer and would not be able to sign the tenancy agreement before returning from a holiday. [NAME] also asked on behalf of his co-tenant: “If circumstances change during this 2nd tenancy, are we able to get a new tenant to sign on and take over the tenancy?” [NAME] replied the same day saying: “Yes you can find someone to take over if you wish during your tenancy.” She also requested that the co-tenant send an email agreeing to the new tenancy for 2025 and that the signed papers be returned immediately otherwise she would need to bring prospective tenants through. [NAME] signed the tenancy agreement on 5 January 2025. The co-tenant did not sign the tenancy agreement.
6. [NAME] sent several emails to the co-tenant throughout January, requesting that he sign the tenancy agreement immediately, noting that [NAME] had already signed. On 28 January 2025, the co-tenant sent [NAME] an email stating: “…unfortunately due to foreseen circumstances I will not be able to continue with the new tenancy agreement.”
7. It appears that after this, [NAME] has crossed out the co-tenant’s name on the tenancy agreement and holds [NAME] liable for the obligations in the tenancy agreement.
8. [NAME] explained that his co-tenant had found a job in another Region and decided to pull out of the tenancy. [NAME] says that he contacted [NAME] and asked if he could also exit the tenancy agreement, but she did not consent and insists that he is liable under the tenancy agreement he signed. [NAME] has remained in the premises. However, he applied to the Tribunal on 14 February 2025 for an order terminating the tenancy under s66 RTA.
9. [NAME] says that he has attempted to find other tenants for the premises without success. [NAME] has confirmed that she is happy to let [NAME] out of the tenancy provided he finds replacement tenants. She notes that it is not her responsibility to find replacement tenants.
10. I emphasize that [NAME]’s application is for termination of the tenancy under s66, which predicates that there is an existing and binding fixed term tenancy agreement. This Tribunal is not being asked to consider other issues that might potentially arise such as: whether there was a valid tenancy agreement given that one of the tenants never signed the tenancy agreement; whether the co-tenant is still liable under the terms of the tenancy agreement notwithstanding that he did not sign it; whether [NAME] could simply terminate the tenancy by giving 21 days’ notice on the basis that the fixed term
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5166434 3
tenancy agreement is not valid and the tenancy has continued as a periodic tenancy. I also make no findings on any of those issues and nor can I comment on whether those claims would succeed.
Has there been an unforeseen change in the tenant's circumstances
11. [NAME] says that he wishes to end the tenancy because he wants to go and live with his father to provide him with support. He says that his father has had a medical condition for 25 years and ongoing health issues that have become worse over the last 4 years. It is unnecessary to document his exact health condition in this decision. However, I record that his father lives alone in a one-bedroom unit. He is working 20 hours/week which covers rent, and [NAME] helps him with expenses. The intention is that [NAME] and his father will find a new home to rent together. He will then be able to provide his father with emotional and financial support and assist him with daily living activities.
12. There was no evidence produced to suggest that [NAME]’ father cannot medically live alone or needs assistance to the extent that the tenant needs to provide him with support immediately. There is also no evidence to suggest that these circumstances have changed since the tenancy agreement was signed. It is of course admirable that the tenant wishes to provide his father with support but there is no change in the tenant’s circumstances as existed before the tenancy was signed, other than his voluntary wish to help his father now. [NAME] also stated that if the Tribunal was to make an order terminating the tenancy, he would need some time before he could vacate the premises as he has not taken any steps yet to find an alternative home for him and his father to rent.
13. I find that the situation described by [NAME] is not “an unforeseen change in the tenant’s circumstances” because there is no evidence that the situation has changed since the tenancy agreement was signed. Because I have found that the “first hurdle” for making an order under s66 has not been proved, it is not necessary to consider the other matters in s 66. The application must be dismissed.
[NAME]
28 April 2025
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5166434 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.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].
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/
Reasons:
⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The tenant wanted to end the tenancy to provide support to his father, but the court found no evidence of an unforeseen change in circumstances.
- The tenant claimed he needed to move to provide support to his father who has ongoing health issues, but the court determined that these conditions existed prior to signing the tenancy agreement.
- The tenant argued that his father's health issues had worsened, but the court found no evidence that these circumstances had changed since the tenancy agreement was signed.
- The tenant requested termination of the tenancy based on his desire to live with his father, but the court ruled that this was not an unforeseen change in circumstances.
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 to terminate the fixed-term tenancy early.
What was the dispute about?
The tenant wanted to end their fixed-term tenancy early due to personal circumstances.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided against the tenant because they did not prove severe hardship as required by the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Residential Tenancies Act 1986, specifically section 66, was applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The tenant argued that they faced severe hardship, but the court found their circumstances were not unforeseen or severe enough.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was against the tenant.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation should ensure they can prove severe hardship before applying to terminate a fixed-term tenancy early.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The judgment does not specify the evidence or documents presented.