Search Results

1. BL v JN Ltd [2023] NZDT 162 (7 June 2023) [pdf, 231 KB]

   ...162 APPLICANT BL RESPONDENT JN Ltd The Tribunal orders: JN Ltd is to pay the sum of $1,600.00 to BL on or before Wednesday, 28 June 2023. REASONS 1. In December 2022, JN Ltd placed an advertisement on [online selling platform] for the sale of a 2011 [redacted] caravan (“the Caravan”) at an asking price of $42,000.00. JN Ltd was selling the Caravan on behalf of its customer, IU. IU wanted the Caravan gone, so asked JN Ltd to reduce the asking price. By March...

2. BN & QN v KE & B Ltd [2021] NZDT 1629 (30 June 2021) [pdf, 234 KB]

   ...Did KE misrepresent the condition of the vehicle by describing it as “a bit of wear and tear but a great ute”? 26. A misrepresentation is a statement of fact, made by one contracting party to another, before or at the time the contract is formed, upon which the purchaser relies, and which proves to be wrong. If a misrepresentation is proved, the purchaser is entitled to damages (compensation) even if the misrepresentation was made innocently and not deliberately. 27. The onus

3. Duty Lawyer Operational Policy [pdf, 461 KB]

   Duty lawyer service Operational policy August 2019 Although all reasonable steps have been taken to ensure the accuracy of the information contained in this document, the Ministry of Justice disclaims any and all responsibility for any inaccuracy, error, omission, or any other kind of inadequacy, deficiency, or flaw in, or in relation to, the information; and fully excludes any and all liability of any kind to any person or entity that chooses to rely upon the information....

4. Duty Lawyer Policy v-2.16.pdf [pdf, 395 KB]

   ...Duty lawyers are not permitted to ask a person if they can be that person’s preferred lawyer. Similarly, they are not permitted to nominate or recommend any other lawyer (or firm/chambers) as the preferred lawyer. If a defendant specifically requests the duty lawyer act for them, they may be nominated as their preferred provider for Criminal Provider Approval Level 3 or 4 cases. In such circumstances, the duty lawyer must provide details as to why they have been nominated as preferre...

5. [2014] NZEmpC 136 Rainbow Falls Organic Farm Ltd v Rockell [pdf, 128 KB]

   ...McKenzie lived in Hong Kong, although he travelled to Kerikeri from time to time and visited the farm. It is apparent that the farm had enjoyed a productive phase during a previous farm manager’s time on it, although there were issues with the performance of the farm manager who held the role just prior to Mr Rockell’s appointment. That relationship had come to an end after about 12 months. It was around this time that Mr McKenzie met with Mr Rockell and discussed the possibi...

6. [2008] NZEmpC AC 15A/08 Potter v Australian Consolidated Press NZ Ltd [pdf, 29 KB]

   ...delay in filing the challenge. The plaintiff states that on 11 March 2008, the date of the determination, he was emailed a copy by his lawyer, Mark Ryan. The email stated “you may want to give me a call and discuss the result”. The plaintiff claims that he was not aware that there was any deadline for filing an appeal and that he believed his lawyer would have told him of his rights and of any deadlines if there were any. He claims that the email did not indicate any urgency i...

7. National Standards Committee 1 v Yang [2024] NZLCDT 8 (27 March 2024) [pdf, 160 KB]

   ...Yang] with weekly DJ lessons.” Mr Yang agrees he had one such lesson. But, in an unsworn “statement of evidence” provided to the Standards Committee in April 2023, Mr Yang said5: “I most certainly did not agree to receive DJ lessons as a form of payment for legal services to [the client].” [11] The client offered inconsistent accounts about the DJ contra proposition. After Mr Yang had ceased acting for the client, and after Mr Yang made his claims in the Disputes Tr...

8. Binning & Anor [2011] NZWHT Auckland 34 [pdf, 82 KB]

   1 [2011] NZWHT AUCKLAND 34 UNDER the Weathertight Homes Resolution Services Act 2006 IN THE MATTER of a reconsideration of the Chief Executive’s decision under section 49 CLAIM NO. 6540: RACHEL ELIZABETH BINNING AND ANGUS PETER WOOD ELIGIBILITY DECISION OF THE CHAIR OF THE WEATHERTIGHT HOMES TRIBUNAL Introduction [1] Rachel Binning and Angus Wood are the owners of a leaky home situated at 10 Raumati Terrace, Khandallah. The origina...

9. P Ltd v V Ltd [2024] NZDT 377 (15 May 2024) [pdf, 178 KB]

   ...this case, CJ had contacted P Ltd about possible drainage damage, and asked P Ltd for assistance. It was agreed between UI and CJ on 1 November that P Ltd would arrange an inspection, which was carried out on 14 November. A week later, CJ asked for information, and P Ltd replied that it had identified damage that required repair and was preparing an [insurer] report. On 5 December, UI asked CJ for the details of the owner of the property so that it could prepare an [insurance] claim and, ha...

10. HL & NL v FL [2022] NZDT 280 (7 November 2022) [pdf, 292 KB]

    ...discussed at the second hearing. SP will collect these items on 30 October 2022. 126. FL is to pay NL $1,125.00. 127. The counterclaim is dismissed. Referee: Nicholas Blake Date: 7 November 2022 Page 10 of 10 Information for Parties Rehearings You can apply for a rehearing if you believe that something prevented the proper decision from being made: for example, the relevant information was not available at the time. If you wish to apply for...