Search Results

1. Strickland v Gaensicke [2011] NZWHT Auckland 46 [pdf, 273 KB]

   ...changes were made to the design of the mezzanine floors, roof height in some locations and spacing of joists. During a failed pre-line check in May 2001 and a recheck in July 2001 the Council inspector noted some of the changes to the plans and requested further documentation. The paper records suggest little was done about this until construction was almost complete. At that stage either the Council or Andre approached Mr Burrows for certification that the dwelling was still...

2. CH v Q Ltd [2021] NZDT 1617 (9 August 2021) [pdf, 175 KB]

   ...2 August 2018). However, I am not satisfied that the Heating System is operating as it should when it keeps dropping in pressure when pressured up, even if it is better since the work done by K Ltd and have concerns regarding its durability and performance over time. (j) CH has paid Q Ltd in full for the Heating System, but he does not have a Heating System that he is confident is working correctly because it is still regularly drops in pressure and the radiators are not heating consi...

3. [2022] NZACC 106 - Easthope v ACC (2 June 2022) [pdf, 186 KB]

   ...brace. [3] The Corporation’s position therefore is that the appeal is now moot and there are no substantive issues to be determined. ACR 13/12 [4] The appellant raises various other issues in relation to the historical management of his claim. The respondent’s position is that these matters are outside of the scope of this appeal. Background [5] Mr Easthope has cover in respect of an accident that occurred on 17 May 1986 when he was spear tackled while playing a gam...

4. TC v F Ltd LM [2021] NZDT 1590 (12 August 2021) [pdf, 184 KB]

   ...fail to meet the acceptable quality standard. What about the fact that LM also represented that it had a current warrant? 8. Having a current warrant is a legal requirement. LM is required to get the warrant and must as a matter of necessity inform TC that the requirement has been met. I do not accept TC’s view that this means that LM is guaranteeing the warrant is validly issued or that the vehicle is in fact road legal. That is not fair to LM who is not required to guarantee t...

5. MT v CE Ltd [2022] NZDT 141 (15 August 2022) [pdf, 95 KB]

   ...find that MT is entitled to the sum of $421.48 for a refund of the original fees, plus damages for the extra costs involved in setting up with a new provider. Referee: K Rendall Date: 15 August 2022 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...

6. EQ v MT Ltd [2022] NZDT 45 (16 May 2022) [pdf, 109 KB]

   ...observed that some of the truck loads of fill delivered were not clean fill but were contaminated with building materials. He discussed this with TG, from MT Ltd, and was initially assured that this would be remedied. However, on 22 December 2022 TG informed him that MT Ltd was removing its equipment, and would not complete the job, remove the contaminated fill, or remedy other damage done to the property. 2. EQ claims the sum of $30,000.00 for the cost of remedial work, and completion...

7. ON v MB Ltd [2023] NZDT 132 (5 May 2023) [pdf, 184 KB]

   ...what some of the coins were advertised at on online auctions in the States. Conclusion 12. As ON has not proven his claim it is dismissed. Referee: Cowie DTR Date: 5 May 2023 CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order 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...

8. BN v NI [2022] NZDT 130 (22 August 2022) [pdf, 195 KB]

   ...done to determine whether there was a leak anywhere else in the heat pump. The assessments and tests showed no leak. Subsequent to this, BN took possession of the property. 9. BN’s evidence that there was a leak relied upon the inspection performed by C of CB Company. C gave evidence at the hearing too. Her evidence was that by this time there definitely was a leak in the heat pump and there was no cost-effective option other than replacing it. There were leak and water marks on the...

9. EC v UI [2023] NZDT 615 (23 November 2023) [pdf, 203 KB]

   ...industry costs for the damage done. I am satisfied that the bumper was off the car when the costs were assessed and would be reflected in the remove and replace costs. Referee: W Lang Date: 23 November 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...

10. SO Ltd v NI & KI [2023] NZDT 189 (15 May 2023) [pdf, 117 KB]

    ...of that year he applied to [the bank] to freeze the account as he was concerned that LM was using the funds for his personal expenses. 11. LM read out an email he said he had received from IK on 20 April 2021 where he wrote that he was not informed that KI and NI were paid $5,000 and the money was therefore stolen by them from the account. 12. There is a great deal in dispute between the former directors and shareholders of SO Ltd and some of that history was canvassed during t...