Search Results

1. TD v U Ltd [2023] NZDT 414 (14 August 2023) [pdf, 192 KB]

   ...first repair, she would have had the same answer as U Ltd gave at the hearing, which was that she caused the problem, and the motorhome was of acceptable quality. 13. TD did not lose her right to claim from U Ltd under the CGA because she informed U Ltd of a problem and U Ltd did not accept it had liability for repairs. What amount should be ordered? 14. I have ordered all the amounts claimed by TD except for the $350.00 for incidentals. I accept a friend helped out howe...

2. EM v KU [2024] NZDT 662 (15 September 2024) [pdf, 193 KB]

   ...that by the time those inspections were undertaken, it is more reasonable that BM (and EM’s partner KM who accompanied BM) were more likely directly relying on their inspection and observations of how the vehicle looked and performed, rather than directly on KU’s earlier statement; g. for the avoidance of doubt I also do not accept on these facts that the provision of an A/C belt by KU (which is now acknowledged to be of the wrong type) was a representa

3. BI v O Inc [2024] NZDT 725 (21 October 2024) [pdf, 164 KB]

   ...not agree with what he describes as “a political narrative of oppressor/oppressed racist ideology.” He also takes issue with a number of public statements made by various members of the leadership of O Inc which he says expressed erroneous information and showed O Inc in a poor light. CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 2 of 4 6. KT, the Chief Executive of O Inc, provided a different context for the comments BI complained about. He also stated that O Inc has the largest proporti...

4. E Ltd v XL [2024] NZDT 563 (9 July 2024) [pdf, 239 KB]

   ...of section 29 of the CGA by E Ltd. 24. Accordingly, I do not find that any further amount is payable to E Ltd. 25. The claim is, therefore, dismissed. Referee: S Malaviya Date: 9 July 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 rehe...

5. KK & PM v S Ltd & SH Ltd [2023] NZDT 43 (23 January 2023) [pdf, 265 KB]

   ...professional, despite black pipes being present and the house being constructed during the period when those pipes were used. CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 3 of 7 13. KK and PM submitted that at the very least the report should have informed them of the possibility that some of the pipes may have been the original Dux Quest piping that was prone to splitting and leaking, both along the pipe and also at the joins. 14. EQ agreed that he would notify his client of the presenc...

6. [2016] NZEmpC 16 Best Health Products Ltd v Nee [pdf, 172 KB]

   ...Ltd v Mitchell [2010] NZCA 385, [2010] ERNZ 446 at [20]. [43] In my view, Ms Nee should be awarded 80 per cent of her costs; that is $1,800. GST is not payable; nor am I satisfied that a “bureau fee” of $40 for “File and storage, forms, faxes, photocopying and Toll/Cell phone calls” should be the subject of the costs award. Costs with regard to BHPL’s application for leave [44] Mr Ogilvie advised that Ms Nee incurred costs in connection with the application...

7. Thoman v Devi [2014] NZIACDT 26 (17 March 2014) [pdf, 118 KB]

   ...The Registrar filed a Statement of Complaint; the central issue is an allegation that the adviser dishonesty made a claim the complainant was a diesel mechanic in an application for residence. [2] The complainant says the adviser presented this information to Immigration New Zealand without his knowledge. [3] The issue is a very serious allegation as it involves the adviser’s alleged failure to address issues with her client and a claim she made a dishonest representation to Immigrat...

8. [2021] NZACC 156 - Holton v ACC (4 October 2021) [pdf, 380 KB]

   ...the time was visiting friends and the attack took place as he was putting his twin children into a vehicle prior to departure. [5] The same day the appellant was assessed by the Accident and Emergency Clinic, Lincoln Road, Henderson. The ACC claim form submitted the same day described what happened as follows: Attacked – inj back/L hand/R hand/laceration R elbow – machete. [6] At the time the appellant was working as a boat builder with Holton Marine. [7] He was referred f...

9. Moore - Waitara East Section 81 B [2018] Chief Judge's MB 842 (2018 CJ 842) [pdf, 226 KB]

   ...4.10(3) of the Māori Land Court Rules 2011 seeking to review the Registrar’s decision to refuse to file an application made by him on 7 May 2018 pursuant to s 45 of Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993 (A20180003483). [2] Following a number of requests to Mr Moore to provide further information, the Registrar informed the applicant by letter dated 10 August 2018 of her decision to refuse to file the application on the basis that it did not comply with r 8.2(2)(b) of the Māori Land

10. CL v BK [2021] NZDT 1612 (9 August 2021) [pdf, 225 KB]

    ...except in certain very limited circumstances, none of which apply in this instance (section 42, Disputes Tribunal Act 1988). 30. BK is to pay CL $2,000.00. Referee: N Blake Date: 9 August 2021 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...