Search Results

1. EH v MG & FG [2024] NZDT 425 (28 May 2024) [pdf, 186 KB]

   ...purchaser discovered that bathroom renovation completed when MG and FG owned the property did not have a Code of Compliance (‘COC’). EH had two offers on the property at the time, one for $940,000.00 and another for $930,000.00. Upon receipt of this information the offer of $940,000.00 was withdrawn, and at a later date the offer of $930,000.00 was reduced to $910,000.00 on the condition that the property sale proceed without the COC. 3. EH claims $30,000.00 from MG and FG for the l...

2. Landon v Auckland Council [2011] NZWHT Auckland 70 [pdf, 131 KB]

   ...necessitated a full reclad: a) lack of vertical control joints within the wall cladding, b) lack of clearance between cladding and adjacent ground and between the cladding and the deck surface, Page | 3 c) solid deck barrier being formed without a membrane or other protection to the top, and d) a fireplace protection where the top of the cladding is used inappropriately as a roof. The Council cross-claims against the second, fourth and fifth respondents and l...

3. Waitangi Tribunal - Wai 2522 2.5.0009 TPPA [pdf, 1.3 MB]

   ...Harawira, Rikirangi Gage and Moana Maniapoto. 8. The claimants allege that the Crown has breached the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi and that prejudice will result. They say:3 a) The Crown has undermined its Treaty partner by failing to provide information and failing to actively consult with Maori in good faith over the TPPA; b) The Crown has failed to actively engage with Maori in decisions that impact on their rights under te Tiriti and at international law notably the United...

4. TN v U Ltd [2024] NZDT 89 (7 February 2024) [pdf, 149 KB]

   ...and inconvenience arising out of the asbestos contamination in 2017. I have therefore deducted this amount from the award of $1200.00 general damages. Referee: R Merrett Date: 7 February 2024 Page 5 of 5 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...

5. M v Accident Compensation Corporation (Treatment Injury) [2024] NZACC 88 [pdf, 366 KB]

   ...examination in clinic on 3 February 2023, there is an area on the dorsal aspect of his glans on the right hand side which measures about .5 x .5 cms which is slightly darker in colour that the rest of the glans. I am not able to comment on what has formed this discoloration and further other than to say that it is present. Dr Amanda Faulkner, Consultant Psychiatrist [57] Dr Faulkner provided two reports dated 10 July 2020 and 28 April 2024, having met M twice in 2020 and then aga...

6. BW x XT [2022] NZDT 202 (12 December 2022) [pdf, 96 KB]

   ...causing him stress. 4. BW seeks all his rent paid of $3,486.00 returned to him and $1,514.00 for the stress he says has suffered. 5. XT has not contested any of this evidence. He did not file any defence or response to the allegations in the claim form. He did not attend today’s hearing. 6. This Tribunal has jurisdiction for claims in contract. The flat sharing agreement is a contract. The major benefit of a flat sharing agreement is the provision of a place to live. One of th...

7. EQ & KQ v S Ltd [2024] NZDT 606 (22 July 2024) [pdf, 114 KB]

   ...the amount ordered is not for Tribunal costs. Conclusion 12. For these reasons S Ltd is to pay KQ and EQ the sum of $6,682.75 by the date stated in the order. Referee: K Rendall Date: 22 July 2024 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 r...

8. MG v TX & QD [2021] NZDT 1631 (30 June 2021) [pdf, 188 KB]

   ...one new lot, and transfer ownership of that lot to MG and her partner. The agreement required MG and her partner to pay TX and QD the costs of the sub-division. 11. MG’s claim may be considered as a claim for damages arising from the non-performance of that contract. However, there are several difficulties with considering the claim on that basis, including: a. Contracts for the sale of land are not enforceable unless they are in writing (section 24, Property Law Act 2007).

9. QE v HN [2024] NZDT 212 (7 March 2024) [pdf, 92 KB]

   ...that of the old fence. [14] Thus, as QE had agreed to pay for the new fencing, and as HN did not agree to pay for anything more, QE’s claim must be dismissed. Referee: C Hawes Date: 7 March 2024 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 r...

10. BS & NS v DL [2023] NZDT 50 (9 February 2023) [pdf, 183 KB]

    ...$2,676.22 for the vet treatment and travel costs. 13. The claim for the filing fee is dismissed and the claim for NS’s medical expenses is struck out. Referee: Sara Grayson Date: 9 February 2023 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...