Pavic then wrote to Bradfield to say she had found a new apartment but would need to move out within four days to accept it so she could be ready to give birth within four weeks.

But Bradfield objected, claiming the couple needed to give him three weeks' notice to vacate and asked them to pay the remaining weeks' rent.

Tenancy Tribunal adjudicator John Hogan ruled that Bradfield's invalid termination notice had caused Pavic "undue stress and inconvenience".

He cited a report by Pavic's doctor, who said she had developed an acute onset of anxiety, sleeplessness, fear of homelessness and a fear of how the drama may impact her baby.

Bradfield's discrimination breached the Human Rights Act and was intentional and not in the public interest, Hogan said.

"In making the award, I have reduced it to some extent, in recognition of Mr Bradfield's honesty in declaring his reason for terminating the tenancy, and because at the hearing, he apologised."

Bradfield was also found to have, earlier in Pavics' tenancy, given them one day's notice before raising their rent by $30 a week.

Landlords are required by law to give at least 60 days notice before raising the rent.

On July 31 Bradfield texted the couple to tell them their rent would increase by $30 a week starting the next day on August 1, Hogan said.

"The required notice was not given by the landlord and fell an extraordinary 59 days short."

Hogan ruled the rent increase was unlawful and ordered $801 refunded along with paying the tenants $460.

Bradfield had returned the couple's $920 bond but never lodged it with the bond centre, Hogan said.

"He retained the tenant's bond in his personal bank account, effectively having the use of it for the entire 20 months of the tenancy.

"During that period, the bond was at risk, the very risk having to lodge the bond was intended to alleviate."