Termination of Tenancy for Breach of Agreement
📌 In brief
The Tenancy Tribunal ended a tenancy because the tenant did not live in the rented house as agreed. The Tribunal ruled that it was unfair to keep the tenancy open when the tenant was not fulfilling their part of the agreement.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant whose obligations under the tenancy agreement are not met can have their tenancy terminated.
📖 What the law says
This section allows the Tenancy Tribunal to end a tenancy if one party has broken a rule in the tenancy agreement or the Act. If the problem can be fixed, the party who wants to end the tenancy must first give the other party a notice asking them to fix it within at least 10 working days.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a lawyer.
📖 Technical summary
The tenancy was terminated due to the tenant's failure to occupy the premises.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tenancy Tribunal terminated the tenancy of a tenant who failed to occupy the premises as required by the tenancy agreement. The Tribunal found that it would be inequitable to refuse termination due to the tenant's prolonged absence and lack of effort to legitimise the situation.
📚 Full judgment Official document
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5181292 1
[2025] NZTT 5181292
TENANCY TRIBUNAL AT REMOTE LOCATION | TE TARAIPIUNARA RETIHANGA
APPLICANT: [redacted]
Landlord
RESPONDENT: [redacted]
Tenant
TENANCY ADDRESS: [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
ORDER
1. The tenancy of [NAME] at [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE] is terminated, and possession is granted to [COMPANY], at 11.59pm on Friday 28 March 2025.
Reasons:
1. The hearing was conducted by telephone. Both parties attended.
2. The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy for breach of the tenant’s obligations.
3. The Tribunal may terminate a tenancy for breach where, due to the nature or extent of the breach, it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate. See section 56(1) pf the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
4. Where the breach is capable of remedy the landlord must first serve a notice on the tenant requiring them to remedy the breach within at least 14 days and establish that the tenant has failed to do so.
5. It is a term of the tenancy agreement that the tenant must live at the premises. The landlord served a 14-day notice on the tenant on 22 January 2025 stating that the tenant had breached that term by not living at the premises and
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5181292 2
required her to reoccupy the premises within 14 days to remedy the breach. The tenant has not reoccupied the premises although she said in evidence that she intended to do so.
6. The tenancy began in February 2024. The tenant occupied the premises with her two young children. She spent some time in prison during the tenancy. When she was released, her ex-partner was given the custody of the children. He has now occupied the premises with the children.
7. The landlord was informed on 16 January 2025 that the tenant was not living at the premises. Rent continued to be paid and there are no arrears.
8. The landlord has tried to engage with the tenant’s ex-partner regarding an application for a transfer of the tenancy to him, but he has not taken any steps to make the application.
9. I do not accept that the tenant intends occupying the premises. If that was a real possibility, I think that she would have done so by now.
10. It would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy because the tenant has not been occupying the premises for a considerable time and there has been no attempt to legitimise the current situation. The landlord is a social housing provider, and it must allocate its limited housing stock based on need. It is not fair to others seeking accommodation from the landlord that people are occupying its houses without going through the process of being assessed as to their need for housing.
11. I have therefore made an order terminating the tenancy. I have given possession of the premises to the landlord in 14 days. That will give the tenant’s ex-partner time to make an application for the tenancy to be transferred and for the application to be processed.
[NAME]
14 March 2025
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5181292 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/
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5181292 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 did not live at the premises as required by the tenancy agreement.
- The landlord provided a 14-day notice to the tenant, who failed to remedy the breach.
- The tenant's ex-partner now occupies the premises with the children, without proper transfer procedures.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The tenant claimed she intended to reoccupy the premises, but failed to do so within the notice period.
- There were no rent arrears, suggesting the tenant was still paying rent despite not living in the premises.
- The landlord attempted to engage the tenant’s ex-partner for a formal transfer application but received no response.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The tenancy was terminated because the tenant did not live in the premises as required by the agreement.
What was the dispute about?
The dispute was about whether the tenant's failure to occupy the premises justified terminating the tenancy.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided to terminate the tenancy because the tenant had not lived in the premises for a significant period and had not attempted to rectify the situation.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Residential Tenancies Act 1986, specifically section 56(1), was applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was that it would be inequitable to refuse termination given the tenant's prolonged absence and lack of effort to legitimise the situation.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was for the landlord who brought the case.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation might face termination of their tenancy if they fail to fulfill their obligations under the tenancy agreement.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The evidence included the tenant's prolonged absence from the premises and the lack of effort to rectify the situation.