Tribunal refuses to hear landlord's case against People's Republic of China
You can't take a case against a sovereign state, even it does leave rubbish at your rental, a Wellington landlord found. A Wellington property owner was unable to get an order in the Tenancy Tribunal to have his tenant, the Chinese embassy, to pay for rubbish removal. The tribunal found that the embassy had “immunity” from such proceedings, and that the tribunal did not have jurisdiction to hear the claims. The New Zealand Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (Mfat) had been granted the right to appear in the tribunal and submitted that the Chinese Embassy had ‘sovereign immunity” against the tribunal. This is not the first time that a landlord has been caught out after renting to a diplomat.
Veröffentlicht : vor 2 Jahren durch Jonathan Killick in Business
A landlord with a property at Wellington's Pipitea Mews was unable to get an order in the Tenancy Tribunal to have his tenant, the Chinese embassy, to pay for rubbish removal.
A landlord cannot take a case against a sovereign state, even if it has left rubbish at a rental, a Wellington property owner has found.
Chandler Investments Limited made an application to the Tenancy Tribunal seeking orders related to cleaning, rubbish removal and cutting keys, according to the decision document.
The Thorndon townhouse had been rented to the Chinese Embassy. Landlord Chris Chandler said he had sought $960, which he thought would have been “immaterial” for the embassy to pay from its bond.
However, when contacted by the tribunal, the Chinese embassy said it had no knowledge of the application. The tribunal, meanwhile, found that the embassy had “immunity” from such proceedings.
“It was definitely a quirk we didn’t see coming,” Chandler told Stuff.
Chandler said based on the experience, it would be the last time he would rent to an embassy.
“No more diplomats, and according to our property manager, that’s the advice he gives to others in the same area as well.”
Tribunal adjudicator Rex Woodhouse determined that the tribunal did not have jurisdiction to hear the claims.
“The claim is filed against the Embassy of the People’s Republic of China in New Zealand. It must follow that the claim is in fact a claim against a state, the People’s Republic of China,” he said in his decision.
The New Zealand Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (Mfat) had been granted the right to appear in the tribunal and submitted that the Chinese embassy had “sovereign immunity”.
“Where a commercial arrangement is closely associated with the diplomatic functions of the state, immunity would apply, and the courts of the receiving state would not have jurisdiction to hear the dispute without a waiver of immunity from the sending state.”
There is an exception to sovereign immunity, where a state enters into a commercial arrangement for profit – but Woodhouse determined that didn’t apply in this situation.
“It must be reasonably considered that when agreeing to rent premises to an embassy, that they were providing accommodation for the operation of the embassy, and consented to an arrangement which fell outside of the usual protections,” Woodhouse said.
It’s not the first time that a landlord has been caught out after renting to a diplomat.
In 2018, Eva Tvarozkova, deputy chief of mission for the European Union (EU) Delegation to New Zealand, skipped out on paying $14,314 in rent.
The Tenancy Tribunal originally ordered that the landlord, Matthew Ryan, was entitled to that money.
However, Mfat stepped in and advised the tribunal about the diplomatic immunity issue and asked for the rehearing.
Mfat said it had tried to get the EU to waive Tvarozkova's immunity, but lawyer Peter Cullen, acting for Tvarozkova and the European Delegation, confirmed it was not waived.
"When the Geneva Convention was first created ... I don't think the intention was ever to protect diplomats from paying rent," the landlord said at the time.
Themen: China