Search Results

1. BX v PN Ltd & NN Ltd [2021] NZDT 1575 (5 August 2021) [pdf, 215 KB]

   ...refund of the purchase price plus freight costs, and compensation for loss of use of the boat. Both parties attended the hearing. Mr T represented NN Ltd. It is noted that the company PN Ltd is not relevant to these proceedings. That company was not formed until after the sale to BX, and it was named in these proceedings in error. Findings 9. The relevant law is the Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (“CGA”). 10. Section 6 CGA states that where goods are supplied to a consumer...

2. RK v KS [2021] NZDT 1349 (20 April 2021) [pdf, 224 KB]

   ...then reinforce the position of buyer beware in private sales, except in limited circumstances. 7. There is, however, relief available for a buyer of a good in a private sale when a misrepresentation is made in the process of the contract being formed. Under section 35 of the CCLA when someone has been induced to enter a contract by a misrepresentation, whether innocent or CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 2 of 4 fraudulent, that person is entitled to damages as if the representation wer...

3. MU v GB [2024] NZDT 189 (14 March 2024) [pdf, 160 KB]

   ...delivering the car to MU after he won the auction? c) If so, what is MU’s remedy? CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 2 of 4 Did MU have an enforceable contract with GB for the sale of the [vehicle]? 6. Parties to a contract must perform their respective obligations. If they do not, they will be in breach and need to account for any loss caused to the other party to the contract. 7. Part 3 of the Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 (CCLA) deals with the sale of goods....

4. OB v BB [2023] NZDT 33 (7 February 2023) [pdf, 142 KB]

   ...4. The driver of a third car, TT, stopped and spoke to the parties after the collision. 5. OB and X Ltd claim the $4327.39 cost of repairs to OB’s car. BB had wished to bring a counter- claim for her damages but did not realise this required a formal lodging of a claim for her $2585.50 costs of repair, and so did not do so in the adjournment period. The parties agreed that this would be dealt with by way of a liability finding in respect of either driver first, then an adjournment for

5. CN v UT & ST [2025] NZDT 30 (10 April 2025) [pdf, 166 KB]

   ...immigrated to New Zealand in 2019, he worked for ST as a chef. 13. The written evidence around the circumstances of CN’s payment of $10,600 is understandably limited given that CN and ST were friends at that time and their arrangements were informal. I must make a decision based on the evidence that is available to me. 14. My finding is that it is more likely than not that this payment was reimbursement to ST rather than a loan to him. 15. There is sufficient evidence to s...

6. TU v TG Ltd & SC [2024] NZDT 481 (19 June 2024) [pdf, 103 KB]

   ...dismissed since no basis has been established for personal liability. Referee: E Paton-Simpson Date: 19 June 2024 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. SU v S Ltd [2025] NZDT 142 (14 February 2025) [pdf, 100 KB]

   ...advice must itself be provided with reasonable care and skill, even if there is no extra charge for that advice. CGA s 29 provides that services must be reasonably fit for any purpose the consumer makes known to the supplier before the contract is formed, unless the circumstances show that the consumer does not rely on the supplier's skill or judgment, or it would be unreasonable for the consumer to do so. 6. The consumer provided a detailed report from EG of S Ltd based on a visual...

8. BX & Q Ltd v QH & HB Ltd [2023] NZDT 365 (8 June 2023) [pdf, 249 KB]

   ...in relation to the contract. (section 41 of the Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 (“CCLA”) 21. The cancellation may be made known by words or by conduct showing an intention to cancel, or both. It is not necessary to use any particular form of words, so long as the intention to cancel is made known. (s41 of the CCLA) 22. QH did not make his intention to cancel the contract known to BX until the 24 September 2020. I am not satisfied that his conduct prior to that showed an...

9. [2024] NZEmpC 127 Carrington Jade LP v Grant [pdf, 385 KB]

   ...had been threats of violence from Mr Cotter and Ms Grant, both of whom, it was claimed, had “stormed” into Mr Tan’s office. The plaintiffs said the decision to dismiss was made because of this threatening conduct.26 [42] Later, Mr Tan requested payroll to process Ms Grant’s timesheet as submitted. The Authority recorded that Ms Waters had advised Mr Tan that the time recorded was justified.27 [43] After Ms Grant and Mr Cotter had left Mr Tan’s office, he prepared and...

10. NK v ND [2023] NZDT 754 (7 December 2023) [pdf, 183 KB]

    ...against ND Result of application for rehearing: Rehearing Refused The Order of 5 September 2023 stands. Reasons for decision: 1. NK filed a rehearing application on 28 September 2023, dated 22 September 2023, saying he was not informed of the hearing date and had to do the hearing in his car without his notes or documents relating to the case and because of this there was confusion about the amount ND had paid him and then owed. He maintained the original price for...