828 items matching your search terms
...(Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2022] NZDT 125 APPLICANT APPLICANT'S INSURER KG [Applicant’s Insurer] FIRST RESPONDENT SQ SECOND RESPONDENT [Vehicle testing company] The Tribunal orders: SQ and [vehicle testing company] are to pay [Applicant’s insurer] $4,840.74 by 18 August 2022. Reasons: 1. On 3 July 2019, a motorcycle belonging to KG was damaged by a truck dr...
...ZXK, LF and ACR all report a second impact to their respective vehicles resulting from ZXL’s impact, but ZXL denies liability for any impact but that with ZXK. Issues [4] The issues to be decided are as follows: (i) Is ZXK liable in negligence for damage to ACR’s vehicle? (ii) Is ZXL liable in negligence for damage to ACR’s vehicle? (iii) What proportion of loss is likely to have been caused by ZXK’s impact and what proportion by ZXL’s impact? (iv) What is the...
...CV the sum of $2,350.00 by 30 October 2015. Facts [1] On 17 May 2015 CV was driving on A Road in B when he had to stop behind a car that was stopped in the road in front of him. XE was travelling behind CV and collided with the rear of his vehicle. CV’s vehicle was badly damaged. Neither young man was insured. The Police attended the crash and XE was issued with an infringement notice. [2] In the Tribunal CV claimed $3,000 from XE being the cost of his vehicle which was wri...
...RESPONDENT Date of Order: 8 March 2017 Referee: Referee: Murphy ORDER OF THE DISPUTES TRIBUNAL The Tribunal hereby orders that the claim is dismissed. Facts [1] Mr GQ and Miss SJ were neighbours. Mr GQ claims his vehicle was parked inside his property during the period 22 October 2016 to 24 October 2016 and Miss SJ’s son has caused damage to the bonnet of his vehicle by throwing stones on to his vehicle. He claims $609.50. Issues [2] The issues I...
...claim for the damage to his vehicle. Issues [4] The issues are: a. Did XA cause a hazard by opening his car door? b. If so, are the costs claimed reasonable? Did XA cause a hazard by opening his car door? [5] The relevant law is the law of negligence. Negligence concerns the duties that one person owes another to take care. The standard of care required is that of a reasonable prudent driver. Drivers must take care not to drive in a manner that causes damage to another vehi...
...the vehicle in front. KH’s car was significantly damaged in the front and back. 2. KH has subrogated her rights to her insurer J Ltd and brings a claim against EI for the sum of $12,198.48. 3. The issues to be resolved are: (a) Was EI negligent when his vehicle hit KH’s car? (b) If so, was KH also negligent and therefore contributed to the collision? (c) If not, what is the remedy? Was EI negligent when his vehicle hit KH’s car? 4. EI explained that although the p...
...[5] The issues are a. Did XK turn into CQ’s lane thereby causing the collision? b. And, if so, are the costs claimed reasonable? Did XK turn into CQ’s lane thereby causing the collision? [6] The relevant law is the law of negligence. Negligence concerns the duties that a person owes to another to take care. Drivers must take care not to drive in a manner that causes damage to another vehicle. The standard of care required is that of a reasonable prudent driv...
...pass on the opposite side of the road. Did KH negligently cause damage to the applicants’ vehicle? 13. As KH was entitled to reverse down the driveway and I have found that the impact most likely occurred in the driveway, I find that negligence on KH’s part is not proven. Although the location of damage to the rear left side of SN’s vehicle usually indicates a failure on the part of a reversing driver to see a vehicle behind them, that is not the issue in this case. A ve...
...10. The issues are: Was the Respondent negligent? Did the Applicant and his friends contribute to the cause of the accident? How much should the Respondent contribute to the Applicant’ loss? Was the Respondent negligent? 11. A finding of negligence requires that there be a duty of care, a breach of that duty and damage as a direct result of that breach. All drivers owe a duty of care to all other road users and adjacent property owners. 12. Here, the Respondent breached her...
...CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 2 of 4 8. The issues are: Was T Ltd’s driver negligent? Was the Applicant contributorily negligent? Is T Ltd liable for the loss of the Applicant’s vehicle? Was T Ltd’s driver negligent? 9. A finding of negligence requires that there be a duty of care, a breach of that duty and damage as a direct result of that breach. All drivers owe a duty of care to all other road users and adjacent property owners. 10. The T Ltd driver had been lead...