"Housing NZ duly arranged to have the test done and the evidence today shows that the premises were indeed contaminated."
Waitemata District Health Board is in charge of alcohol and drug treatment for the region. A spokesman said drug and alcohol services did not have a policy of sharing patient information with Housing NZ.
The spokesman said there was nothing in the patient's records to indicate that information was given to the housing provider.
Richard Williams, acting group manager of courts and tribunals at the Ministry of Justice, said he would not comment on judicial decisions or evidence provided to judicial officers in hearings.
"However, any party who disagrees with a Tenancy Tribunal decision has the right to seek a rehearing, or, if the amount in dispute is $1000 or more, to appeal to the District Court."
A Housing NZ spokeswoman said it did not release personal information without authorisation from a tenant.
"In a generic sense, Housing New Zealand would not act on the information alone and move to undertake testing (as in this case) without first carrying out its own very thorough assessment of the situation before-hand."
The tribunal concluded that the contamination "more than likely" occurred while the tenant was occupying the apartment.
He was ordered to pay $2300 for the cost of the test and a further hearing was scheduled to determine remediation costs.
It is not known whether the tenant was evicted, though this was the usual practice under HNZ rules for meth testing which have now been discredited.
A report by Chief Science Adviser Professor Sir Peter Gluckman released last week said residue from methamphetamine use posed no health risks.
