Search Results

1. K Ltd v SG [2023] NZDT 211 (23 May 2023) [pdf, 92 KB]

   ...that period, she is liable to pay for them. [3] SG said that she herself had never had a contract with T Ltd, which had contracted with the company and provided its services to the company. She said that that all creditors of the company had been informed at some point of the removal of the company from the Register, but was unable to say when T Ltd learned of it. She did not consider that she was liable for what was, in her view, a company debt. She acknowledged that she had continued f...

2. BU v Q Ltd [2023] NZDT 427 (5 July 2023) [pdf, 109 KB]

   ...referred to guidelines published by [Company] in support of her position. In contrast Q Ltd argued that a conduit was not required, and that it had met the minimum standards required by [Company]. 6. I accept that there is some inconsistency in the information given by [Company]. Each party relies on an email from a [Company] representative, supporting their position. They have both also referred to guidance published by [Company]. BU presented a booklet entitled “[redacted]” in w...

3. LN & QH v KA & Ors [2025] NZDT 69 (11 March 2025) [pdf, 177 KB]

   ...reaches the age of 18, has left school, and possibly until he has any ability to pay. As stated above, his parents are not responsible for his debt. Hannan DTR Disputes Tribunal Referee 11 March 2025 Page 3 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...

4. Zhong v Auckland Council [2011] NZWHT Auckland 32 [pdf, 264 KB]

   ...Crowe‟s evidence is based on invasive testing and none of the other experts concur with Dr Walls. Liability for the apron flashing defects [30] The panel of experts was asked to give their opinion on whether the apron flashings were formed correctly, the stage of construction when kick- outs should have been formed and the trade responsible. All experts agreed that the apron flashings were required to be installed with sufficient length to enable a diverter to be craft...

5. Te Manutukutuku Issue 23 [pdf, 2.5 MB]

   ...Crown Research Institutes or health sector entities are subject to the protection mechanism. Land owned by regional or territorial authorities, State Owned Enterprises and some tertiary institutions are excluded. The Department of Survey and Land Information (DOSLI) will be responsible for sending a list of all sur­ plus land to iwi at regular intervals. The lists will also be published in national newspapers. Iwi will be given a minimum of 30 days to file their response. Information...

6. Jordan v Accident Compensation Corporation (Cover and Entitlements) [2023] NZACC 202 [pdf, 264 KB]

   ...Corporation's 27 November 2020 decision declining cover for a head injury is inconsistent with the earlier covered decision by the Corporation. [3] The Corporation agrees the appellant has cover for a concussion injury (a traumatic brain injury). The claim as lodged was essentially a claim for entitlement to weekly compensation arising from the 1996 injury. In consequence, the main issue is whether the appellant continues to suffer the symptoms of his covered 1996 injury....

7. [2025] NZEmpC 270 Smalley v Hamilton Hindin Greene Ltd (Interlocutory (No 2) Judgment [pdf, 328 KB]

   ...having been provided previously; (b) directly relevant but were not previously disclosed; and (c) heavily redacted Board documents. [36] These submissions criticised HHG’s handling of disclosure by expressing concern that each time a disclosure request was made it resulted in additional documents being provided. Some of those documents were described as repetitious, but it was said that on occasion new material was disclosed including documents previously described as non-exist...

8. Needham v Accident Compensation Corporation (Cover for Occupational Noise-induced Hearing Loss) [2024] NZACC 133 (5 August 2024) [pdf, 314 KB]

   ...thresholds elevated from 3kHz (30dB) to maximal hearing loss at 6kHz (70dB). The comment was "mild to severe sloping loss (R) ear, probably noise-related. Mild sensorineural loss (L) ear”. [8] The Court asked Mrs Needham whether an injury claim form had been filed for this accident. Mrs Needham said she and her husband expected the claim would have been completed by the Timaru hospital to which Mr Needham had been referred by a doctor in Ashburton. Mrs Needham said she...

9. IH v LM [2022] NZDT 136 (3 August 2022) [pdf, 192 KB]

   ...fencing notice properly served? 5. Section 10 of the Fencing Act 1978 provides that an occupier who desires to compel a neighbouring “occupier” to contribute to the cost of work on a fence shall serve a notice on the occupier in the prescribed form. “Occupier” is defined in s 2 to mean the owner in most cases including the present case. If the owner at the relevant time was Q Ltd as the respondent stated, then the wrong respondent has been named on the fencing notice and in this c...

10. CH v NB [2021] NZDT 1680 (8 November 2021) [pdf, 127 KB]

    ...c) Is GST payable? Did NB agree to pay for QC Ltd’s service? CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 2 of 3 4. The common law of contract allows parties to enter into legally binding agreements. A contract need not be in writing; an agreement can be formed verbally or inferred from the parties’ conduct. However, the applicant bears the onus of proving the terms of the contract, which can be difficult where the other party disputes what was agreed. 5. The adviser, representing QC Ltd, gave...