Search Results

1. TQ & BC v B Transport [2023] NZDT 441 (30 August 2023) [pdf, 182 KB]

   ...evidence available). His actions are further justified by the fact that the remote attendant allowed him entry to the carpark and that there were in fact available EV parking spaces for him to use. I therefore find there to have been no contributory negligence on TQ’s part. The bolts protruding from the grounds could not have been seen from a driver’s position inside a car on the ramp and the fact they were positioned on the dividing line between lanes does not mean that TQ should...

2. Canterbury Westland Standards Committee No. 1 v Grave [2016] NZLCDT 8 [pdf, 62 KB]

   ...Practitioner 2 DECISION OF THE NEW ZEALAND LAWYERS AND CONVEYANCERS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL AS TO PENALTY AND NAME SUPPRESSION Introduction [1] Mr Grave faced one charge, pleaded with three alternative levels of conduct – misconduct, negligence and unsatisfactory conduct. After negotiations with the Standards Committee, Mr Grave agreed to admit the charge at the level of negligence and this, with an agreed set of facts was put to the Tribunal, along with suggest...

3. KW v NX [2023] NZDT 264 (20 June 2023) [pdf, 183 KB]

   ...medical costs of $69.50? CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 2 of 3 Did NX fail to give way to KW when she drove from [Road 2] onto [Road 1], causing damage to KW’s e-scooter? Is KW entitled to claim repair costs of $430.00? 5. The law of negligence requires every driver to take care to drive in a manner that does not cause damage to other road user’s vehicles or property. A driver turning into another road, from a stop sign must ensure the way is clear before they proceed and...

4. VL v U Ltd & LF Ltd [2023] NZDT 671 (6 December 2023) [pdf, 114 KB]

   ...noise of the starter rubbing on the fly wheel was not present when he gave U Ltd his car. CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 2 of 4 8. U Ltd and LF Ltd claim the damage caused by incorrect towing has been fixed, and that any other damage to the vehicle was caused by wear and tear and have denied liability for fixing these issues. They say the mounting seal/ring that has caused the motor to be unaligned with the flywheel has nothing to do with the incorrect towing, or the replaced transm...

5. KD v N Ltd & HX [2023] NZDT 424 (3 July 2023) [pdf, 280 KB]

   ...late 2021. KD says the area N Ltd is located is a high risk area for flooding because it is low lying. He says therefore N Ltd owed a duty of care to him. In other words, he says N Ltd were negligent in moving to [Address 1] and as a result of that negligence his bike got water damaged. 4. He says, in his correspondence to N Ltd, that he expected his bike to be covered under N Ltd’s insurance. In an email from N Ltd to KD in March 2023 they say they could not give any guarantee rega...

6. TH v BC [2024] NZDT 141 (16 April 2024) [pdf, 215 KB]

   ...(e) If not, did TH contribute to the collision? (f) If not, is BC responsible for the collision? (g) If so, was there damage caused to TH’s car? (h) If so, what is the remedy? What is the legal framework? 3. 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 vehicle....

7. BD & NT v S Ltd & C Ltd [2024] NZDT 769 (4 October 2024) [pdf, 105 KB]

   ...is payable by the subcontractor to the clients? 13. Although the subcontractor had no contract with the clients, it owed them a legal duty of care to carry out the concrete work with reasonable care. Breach of a duty of care can found an action in negligence, and I conclude that the subcontractor has the same liability to the clients in negligence that the builder has to them under the CGA. CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 3 of 5 Did the subcontractor breach its contract with the builder...

8. CQ Ltd v CE [2024] NZDT 473 (12 June 2024) [pdf, 129 KB]

   ...median strip to turn right and the two cars collided. 3. The issues for the Tribunal to determine are whether CE caused the damage to NB’s van and whether the costs of repair are reasonable. 4. The law governing this claim is the law of negligence. All drivers owe a duty of care to other roads users not to drive carelessly and damage other people’s property while driving. The standard by which negligence on the road is judged is found in the Land Transport Act 1998 and the L...

9. EF Ltd & EFE Ltd v UU [2015] NZDT 925 (3 August 2015) [pdf, 83 KB]

   ...the Toyota Hilux contributed to the incident. Finally, it must be determined whether the costs claimed are reasonable. Did UU cause the damage by failing to give way and/or failing to give a proper look out? [4] The relevant law is the law of negligence. Drivers must take reasonable care in operating their vehicle and are responsible for any reasonably foreseeable damage suffered as a result of a failure to do so. The duty to take reasonable care includes the duty to give way a...

10. KN v ID Inc [2021] NZDT 1527 (13 August 2021) [pdf, 216 KB]

    ...a. Did the respondents owe a duty of care? b. Was that duty breached? c. If so, did the breach cause the damage and was it foreseeable? d. What is the reasonable cost of repairing the damage? Did the respondents owe a duty of care? 4. In a negligence claim four elements must be proven. The first is the duty of care. A duty of care arises when parties are in close proximity to each other and it is reasonably foreseeable that if a standard of reasonable care is not adhered to then th...