Pet clauses have been a contentious issue recently, particularly since these piggies jumped onto the Herald front page. Tribunal adjudicators remain divided on whether no-pet clauses are enforceable and if a breach warrants termination under section 56. The lack of certainty and impending changes to tenancy rules vis-à-vis pets make this issue a pressing headache for many landlords and create unnecessary impediments for tenants who simply want to get on with their lives.
As the rental sector continues to manoeuvre around this moving target, a recent Tribunal order highlights yet another layer of complexity: the critical distinction between companion animals and certified disability dogs and its implications as to the enforceability of no-pet clauses in tenancy agreements. As tenancy law evolves, grasping these nuances becomes increasingly consequential for all parties involved.
The Legal Status of Companion Animals
Simply put, there is none, at least not now.
“Companion Animals” is not a reserved term, and these furry friends are legally pets and do not confer special rights to their owners in tenancy situations. Certified disability dogs, on the other hand, are protected under the law as an extension of their disabled owners and generally cannot be restricted from rental properties.
The tenant argued his dog was exempt from pet rules due to its registration with the Companion Animals NZ Register. However, this register is merely a microchipping database and confers no special legal status.
It is worth noting that while therapy and emotional support animals are increasingly common for mental health management, they lack the legal status of certified disability dogs. Even with healthcare professional certification, they are captured by any and all (enforceable) pet provisions in the tenancy agreement. In the long term, it is not unreasonable to expect the rules around therapy and emotional support animals to evolve alongside their general status across all areas of our laws.
Enforceability of Pet Clauses Remain a Complex Issue
Pet clause enforceability in tenancy agreements is complex, depending on the agreement’s circumstances, the nature of the tenancy and pet, and adjudicators’ perspectives. While the incoming amendments to the RTA will provide some certainty (and restriction), significant grey areas will remain.
Before the rental sector can settle into a de facto norm, landlords and property managers should carefully note cases that highlight tenants’ arguments against enforceability or seek to exempt their pets from any enforceable clauses and be mindful of the following:
- Recognise that while certified disability dogs generally cannot be restricted, companion animals can be subject to enforceable pet rules.
- Stay informed about evolving tenancy laws and Tribunal decisions regarding pets.
- Consider each pet situation individually, taking into account the specific circumstances of the tenancy and the property.
- Consider replacing blanket no-pet clauses with ‘permission required’ clauses for pets, as the Tribunal tends to respond more positively to these.
In this ever-evolving landscape, staying informed and adaptable is essential to ensuring that the pet clauses in your tenancy agreements remain fully operational.
Sarina Gibbon
Sarina Gibbon is the general manager of the APIA.
Add Comment