Tribunal Dismisses Claim for Lack of Jurisdiction
📌 In brief
The Tenancy Tribunal dismissed a claim for lack of jurisdiction because the premises were shared with the landlord's family members, falling outside the scope of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
⚖️ Legal holding
The RTA does not apply where the premises continue to be used principally as a place of residence by the landlord or a member of their family.
📖 What the law says
This section lists specific situations where the Residential Tenancies Act does not apply, such as when the premises are commercial, or when a tenant's income largely comes from using the premises for farming or similar activities.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a lawyer.
📖 Technical summary
The Tenancy Tribunal dismissed the claim due to lack of jurisdiction under the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tenancy Tribunal dismissed a claim for lack of jurisdiction under the Residential Tenancies Act 1986, finding that the premises continued to be used principally as a place of residence by the landlord's family members.
📚 Full judgment Official document
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5103868 1
[2025] NZTT 5103868
TENANCY TRIBUNAL AT REMOTE LOCATION | TE TARAIPIUNARA RETIHANGA
APPLICANT: [redacted]
Applicant
RESPONDENT: [redacted]
Respondent
TENANCY ADDRESS: [ADDRESS], [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
ORDER
1. The application is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
Reasons:
1. Both parties attended the teleconference hearing on 12th March 2025.
2. The applicant lodged an application to the Tenancy Tribunal after their stay at the respondent’s house had ended.
3. The respondent stated that their living situation had been a flatmate housing sharing situation and not a true landlord-tenant situation.
4. The starting point for any residential stays is that they come under the jurisdiction of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”).
5. There are situations where the RTA does not apply and they are explained in section 5.
6. Section 5(1)(n) of the RTA states that the RTA does not apply “where the premises, not being a boarding house, continue to be used, during the tenancy, principally as a place of residence by the landlord or the owner of the premises or by any member of the landlord’s or owner’s family.”
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5103868 2
7. At the teleconference, the parties confirmed that the respondent’s adult children had been living at the premises at the same time throughout their stay.
8. Therefore, I find that section 5(1)(n) RTA applies to the parties and dismiss this claim due to lack of jurisdiction.
J Yi
13 March 2025
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5103868 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/
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5103868 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 respondent's adult children lived at the premises throughout the applicant's stay.
- The premises continued to be used principally as a place of residence by members of the landlord’s family.
- The situation did not qualify under the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The applicant believed the situation was covered under the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
- The application was made to the Tenancy Tribunal based on a landlord-tenant relationship.
- The application sought jurisdiction under the RTA despite the living situation involving family members.
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 claim for lack of jurisdiction.
What was the dispute about?
The dispute was about whether the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 applied to the situation where the landlord's family members lived in the premises.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided that the RTA did not apply because the premises were used principally as a place of residence by the landlord's family members.
Which laws or rules were applied?
Section 5(1)(n) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 was applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was that the premises were used principally as a place of residence by the landlord's family members.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was against the person who brought the case.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation might find that the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 does not apply if the premises are used principally as a place of residence by the landlord's family members.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The fact that the landlord's family members lived in the premises at the same time as the claimant mattered.