Search Results

1. MQ v N Inc [2024] NZDT 526 (26 July 2024) [pdf, 207 KB]

   ...Inc liable to refund the $50.00 staff costs and $150.00 venue hire because they closed the bar earlier than agreed? 6. MQ claims she is entitled to a refund of the bond because the bar staff closed the bar earlier than agreed and she was not informed prior. N Inc say that they encountered repeated instances of people drinking in the carpark, and evidence of people drinking alcohol not purchased in the venue in the toilets, activity which was a breach of the terms and conditions of hi...

2. X Ltd v K Ltd [2023] NZDT 284 (25 July 2023) [pdf, 93 KB]

   ...at the time they were stolen, K Ltd is not required to compensate X Ltd for breach of the contract, because I have not found that any breach has occurred. Referee: M Wilson Date: 25 July 2023 Page 3 of 3 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 a rehe...

3. BI & SI v BA [2023] NZDT 142 (2 May 2023) [pdf, 154 KB]

   ...the cars that the Applicants understood they were purchasing. 3. At the first hearing I adjourned to allow the Applicants further time to obtain documents from the Police file. At the second hearing the Applicants told me that they had further information which they wanted the Tribunal to consider, I allowed the Applicants further time to send in these documents, which they did. I confirm that I have considered all the evidence filed by the Applicants in determining this matter. 4....

4. DN v NS [2024] NZDT 336 (23 May 2024) [pdf, 127 KB]

   ...claim. NS has not been in contact with the Tribunal. I attempted to call NS but was unable to reach him. NS was posted the notice of hearing in April 2024 and a reminder was emailed to him prior to the hearing. I am satisfied that NS was properly informed of the claim, the hearing date and time, and the matter could proceed in his absence. 4. The issues to be resolved are: a. Did NS cause damage to DN’s car? b. If so, is DN entitled to claim $3,252.34? Did NS cause damage to DN�...

5. NX v B Association Ltd & JE [2023] NZDT 433 (15 August 2023) [pdf, 192 KB]

   ...misrepresentation, which provides a remedy for a buyer if a seller makes a misrepresentation about an item being sold. 6. A misrepresentation is: a statement of fact; made by one contracting party to another; before or at the time the contract is formed; that the purchaser relies on in entering into the contract; and which proves to be wrong. If a misrepresentation is proved, the purchaser is entitled to a remedy, whether the misrepresentation was made innocently or deliberately.

6. ND v X Ltd [2024] NZDT 689 (12 September 2024) [pdf, 105 KB]

   ...regarding every such claim. I decline to make an order for stress in this situation. 22. Taken together, that means that X Ltd must pay ND $3,081.75. Referee: Souness - DTR Date: 12 September 2024 Page 4 of 4 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 a reh...

7. Boyd v Legacy Church and Legacy Housing (Strike-Out) [2023] NZHRRT 2 [pdf, 138 KB]

   ...from Ms Boyd. [11] On 9 January 2023 the Tribunal received an email from Mr Tennet advising he was having difficulties contacting Ms Boyd, that she had also not maintained contact (although Mr Tennet noted that may not be the fault of Ms Boyd) and requesting until 27 January 2023 to file an updating email. [12] There has been no further correspondence from Mr Tennet. JURISDICTION TO STRIKE OUT [13] Pursuant to HRA, s 115A (which applies to these proceedings under s 111 of the P...

8. SC v CX [2022] NZDT 116 (2 August 2022) [pdf, 204 KB]

   ...contacted the Disputes Tribunal and advised that due to his absence, he was happy for me to make a decision based on the existing evidence, stating he had nothing more to add. 4. CX was advised that SC had asked me to make a decision based on the information before me. He was asked if he was happy for me to do this. He agreed. 5. Both parties were advised I would be making a decision based on the information they provided as they had declined the opportunity for a further hearing....

9. LG & G Ltd v QN & IM [2024] NZDT 841 (9 December 2024) [pdf, 179 KB]

   ...determine whether the amount claimed is fair and reasonable. Was the dispute settled by the Respondents’ payment on 26 July 2024? 8. The law of contract applies. When the parties to a dispute reach an agreement to resolve a dispute, a contract is formed between them which stands alone and is separate to any previous contract between them. If the parties comply with the terms of the settlement, the dispute is resolved, and both parties are bound be that settlement and neither party...

10. CC v SN & KM [2023] NZDT 475 (25 August 2023) [pdf, 167 KB]

    ...contract in terms of her original proposal, but more an acknowledgement that work on the fence of some nature would be needed at some stage, whether it be a repair or rebuild. 15. I find there was not an enforceable contract between the parties formed on 11 January 2023. CC’s claim is dismissed. 16. Consequently it is not necessary to consider any remedy CC and KM had. CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 4 of 6 Counterclaim Does SN’s counterclaim of 10 February rely...