Search Results

1. UE v TF & KD [2024] NZDT 652 (9 September 2024) [pdf, 196 KB]

   ...damages in the sum of $23,000 which is the cost of a new engine. 3. The matter was first heard on 25 June 2024 before DTR Wilson. Partway through the hearing, a report was mentioned that was supplied by KD to UE which allegedly contained incorrect information. The matter was adjourned to give UE the opportunity to add KD as a Second Respondent after which the hearing was to be started afresh. 4. I heard the matter today with KD present as a Second Respondent. Issues: 5. After...

2. DI v KB Ltd and others [2024] NZDT 679 (28 August 2024) [pdf, 99 KB]

   ...enquired about whether the van was insured; she had assumed that it was because she considered it to be a courtesy car, provided in the course of OL’s business to SD. [4] On 29 January 2024, DI had an accident while driving the van. Her father had informed SD about this. After some discussion, SD had said that he and OL would sort the matter out with the insurer of the other party to the accident. [5] DI was subsequently found liable in a separate Disputes Tribunal proceeding for t...

3. N Ltd v T Ltd [2024] NZDT 341 (25 May 2024) [pdf, 97 KB]

   ...https://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1986/0121/latest/link.aspx?id=DLM311052 CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 2 of 3 7. In the email communications between the parties T Ltd stated that breach notices are enforced under contract law. N Ltd informed T Ltd that the driver had no authority to enter into a contract on the company’s behalf and provided supporting evidence. N Ltd also provided T Ltd with a copy of a Disputes Tribunal decision which canvasses the issue of a driver parki...

4. BE v E Ltd [2025] NZDT 244 (12 June 2025) [pdf, 184 KB]

   ...not’), that the advice given by LN was negligent or wrong. 15. BE’s claim is therefore dismissed and there is no need for me to address the second issue. Referee: R Merrett Date: 12 June 2025 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...

5. [2025] NZEmpC 246 Lanigan v Fonterra Brands (New Zealand) Ltd [pdf, 164 KB]

   ...list of documents with regard to s 54 and s 56 of the Evidence Act. [12] The relevant aspects of s 54 relating to privilege for communications with legal advisers provide: 54 Privilege for communications with legal advisers (1) A person who requests or obtains professional legal service from a legal adviser has a privilege in respect of any communication between the person and the legal adviser if the communication was— (a) intended to be confidential; and (b) made in the...

6. [2011] NZEmpC 68 Army Surplus Disposals Ltd v Reed [pdf, 110 KB]

   ...produce this book to the Authority. (d) Mr Doyle claimed he could provide further evidence that Mr Reed received the money alleged if he was given time. The Authority Member allowed Mr Doyle 10 days following the investigation to provide this information but he failed to do so. [5] The determination records findings and orders as follows: [7] By operating its business on a cash basis, without documentation, the respondent has put itself in a vulnerable position. In the absence...

7. Newel [2013] NZWHT Auckland 19 [pdf, 79 KB]

   ...“built”. [7] Lang J also considered the effect of s 43(1) of the Building Act 1991 which provides as follows: 43 Code compliance certificate (1) An owner shall as soon as practicable advise the territorial authority, in the prescribed form, that the building work has been completed to the extent required by the building consent issued in respect of that building work. [8] He concluded that if this reasoning is applied to the consideration of the built- by...

8. NS v L Ltd [2024] NZDT 5 (30 January 2024) [pdf, 122 KB]

   ...has passed, his claim for a refund must be dismissed because the vests he received matched the description L Ltd provided and were fit for purpose. Referee: P McKinstry Date: 30 January 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...

9. ZE v NE [2022] NZDT 90 (26 August 2022) [pdf, 177 KB]

   ...Page 2 of 3 8. For these reasons I find that NE was not negligent and is not responsible for the cat’s distressing injuries nor the costs to treat them. Referee Perfect Date: 26 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...

10. DQ v BH [2024] NZDT 810 (15 November 2024) [pdf, 91 KB]

    ...salvage amount obtained for the wreck. 2. The dispute centres around the pre-accident value PAV) used in J Ltd’s calculations. The vehicle was insured with an ‘agreed value’ of $2750.00 and the assessor has noted on the repair assessment form that PAV is $2750.00. An ‘agreed value’ for insurance purposes is not necessarily the same as a market value, and it is market value just prior to the collision that is used for an accurate measure of damages resulting from negligence....