Tribunal Denies Expedited Termination of Tenancy Due to Insufficient Evidence
📌 In brief
The Tenancy Tribunal denied a landlord's request to terminate a tenancy quickly due to lack of sufficient evidence. The Tribunal emphasised the need for clear documentation to support such requests.
⚖️ Legal holding
A landlord must provide robust documentary evidence to substantiate claims for expedited termination of a tenancy.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal declined to grant an expedited termination of the tenancy due to insufficient evidence.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tenancy Tribunal denied an expedited termination of a tenancy, citing insufficient evidence provided by the landlord. The Tribunal required robust documentary evidence to substantiate claims for expedited termination.
📚 Full judgment Official document
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5158712 1
[2025] NZTT 5158712
TENANCY TRIBUNAL
APPLICANT: [redacted] & Julie Brzozowski
Landlord
RESPONDENT: [redacted]
Tenant
TENANCY ADDRESS: Unit/[ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
ORDER
1. The application for termination under the expedited abandonment process is not granted.
2. The application is referred to Tenancy Services for a full hearing to be scheduled.
Reasons:
1. The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy for abandonment through the expedited process under section 91AA Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Are there grounds for an expedited application?
2. The two requirements for the expedited process are:
a. The tenant does not want to contest the abandonment application.
b. The information provided by the landlord with the application is sufficient to enable the Tribunal to determine it properly without a hearing (either on the basis of the information alone or with only minor clarifications).
3. If the requirements for the expedited process are met, the Tribunal may terminate the tenancy where the premises have been abandoned and rent is in arrear at the hearing date. See section 61 Residential Tenancies Act 1986. A tenancy is
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5158712 2
abandoned where the tenant leaves the premises without reasonable excuse, not intending to return or to meet their obligations, and fails to notify the landlord.
4. I am not satisfied that both conditions for the expedited process are met. The information provided by the landlord with this application is not sufficient to enable the Tribunal to determine it properly without a hearing.
5. The landlord says they were contacted by Police to execute a search warrant at the premises. The search took place, and the landlord says they visited on 4 February 2025 and the premises was in the same condition Police left it in. The building manager says that the tenant has not been seen for over 3 weeks and the landlord has not had any contact.
6. I acknowledge that rent appears to be in arrears in accordance with the rent summary provided. However, the Tribunal would have expected to see additional documentary evidence to substantiate the allegations made. The power to terminate a tenancy and return possession of the rental premises to the landlord without the tenant being heard, as provided by section 91AA RTA, is a power that restricts a respondent's right and opportunity to know the case against them. Therefore, where a landlord seeks to take advantage of a process to end a tenancy without a hearing, robust documentary evidence must be provided to substantiate the claim.
7. In this case, I would have expected to see an inspection report, photographs, Police report, and all relevant correspondence.
8. In the absence of any evidence other than a superficial description, I find that the landlord has not satisfied the statutory requirements or discharged the burden of proof.
9. I decline to grant the application and this matter will be scheduled for a full hearing as soon as possible.
[NAME]
17 February 2025
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5158712 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. 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 accepted
- The landlord's information was not enough for the Tribunal to decide the case without a full hearing.
- The Tribunal requires robust documentary evidence to support claims for expedited termination.
- The landlord did not provide an inspection report, photographs, a Police report, or relevant correspondence.
- The landlord did not meet the legal requirements or prove their case.
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 landlord's request for expedited termination of the tenancy.
What was the dispute about?
The dispute was about whether the landlord could terminate the tenancy through an expedited process due to alleged abandonment.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided against granting the expedited termination because the landlord did not provide sufficient evidence to support the claim.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Residential Tenancies Act 1986, specifically section 91AA, was applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was the requirement for robust documentary evidence to substantiate claims for expedited termination.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was against the landlord who brought the case.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
For tenants facing similar situations, this means that landlords must provide strong evidence to support claims for expedited termination.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The judgment mentions the need for an inspection report, photographs, police report, and all relevant correspondence.