Search Results

1. Gorgus v Corrections [2023] NZHRRT 22 [pdf, 316 KB]

   ...interference with Mr Gorgus’ privacy. Corrections has appropriately accepted this, as it failed to acknowledge or action either of those requests as required by PA, ss 40 and 66(4), without any proper basis. It is to that interference that any claimed causation must attach when the question of remedies is considered in relation to the First Request and Second Request. WHETHER CORRECTIONS HAS GOOD REASONS FOR WITHHOLDING OR REDACTING PERSONAL INFORMATION [32] Corrections submits tha...

2. BI v L Ltd [2025] NZDT 218 (28 May 2025) [pdf, 237 KB]

   ...the onus of proof being on the balance of probabilities — that is, that something was more likely than not to be the case. I explained to the parties the difficulties in a “he said she said” situation and the fact that I could only consider information that had been put before me. 10. The issues to be determined are: (a) Is the lifetime membership valid? (b) Is L Ltd’s termination of the membership valid? (c) What, if any, remedy should BI be entitled to? Is the lifetim...

3. [2014] NZEmpC 53 NZ Meatworkers Union v Alliance Group Ltd [pdf, 184 KB]

   ...not pursue the claims vigorously after 2006 because they only affected a minority of the Union’s members and because similar issues were then before the courts. [18] Although the substance of the annual holidays provisions did not change, the form of them was tidied up by the removal in the 2008/2009 agreement of the first paragraph of cl 9(g)(ii). Thus, the provision which must be construed and applied in this case is: (g) The provisions of the Holidays Act 2003 and any Act pa...

4. Potae v ACC [2014] NZACA 5 [pdf, 65 KB]

   ...the terms as detailed in paragraph 1 above. 5. If the Authority has in mind making a referral back on terms additional to that proposed here, then counsel would first require to be heard. [7] The appeal decision is therefore intended to form the basis for the investigation of Hiria’s claim under s 2(a)(i) and records the relevant background facts and medical information that have a bearing on the consideration of the claim in light of Mitchell, and the directions that wil...

5. UM v PH Ltd [2021] NZDT 1682 (14 December 2021) [pdf, 173 KB]

   ...because they were not of acceptable quality or were unfit for their purpose. The necessary proof is simply lacking, and UM’s claim must therefore be dismissed. Referee: C Hawes Date: 14 December 2021 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...

6. KM & LM v BN [2023] NZDT 181 (12 July 2023) [pdf, 122 KB]

   ...more; and b. BN is not entitled to a refund of the amount that she has paid. CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 4 of 5 Referee: Nicholas Blake Date: 12 July 2023 (date of issuance of amended Order) Page 5 of 5 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...

7. DC v T Ltd [2023] NZDT 642 (13 November 2023) [pdf, 104 KB]

   ...CJ LTD tested the battery and provided data to T Ltd. T Ltd does not have (and has never had) physical possession of the battery. b. The data is inconclusive in terms of the reason for the failure. The results show no sign of reduction in performance over time, which is the common symptom of cell balance. This aligns with DC’s evidence that he did not experience any loss of performance before the sudden failure of the battery. c. A cell failure could have a range of causes incl...

8. TM v B Ltd [2024] NZDT 142 (11 April 2024) [pdf, 104 KB]

   ...problem, they began asking agents to provide customers with questions and specifically to ask them if the property is “stacked” or not. 15. SH said insurance companies do not look up house sales online to check the property and rely on the information provided them. He said that the problem became apparent when W realised it needed to ask the question to get that information. 16. Because the only evidence provided to prove TM’s claim is basically his opinion, and because SH p...

9. H Ltd v TU, DU and GU as trustees for the U Family Trust [2024] NZDT 185 (4 March 2024) [pdf, 92 KB]

   ...caused by the failure of the Trust to keep its roof clean. For this reason, it is not necessary to consider the other two issues and the claim is dismissed. Referee: Sara Grayson Date: 4 March 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 reh...

10. HC v S Ltd [2023] NZDT 482 (6 July 2023) [pdf, 192 KB]

    ...[Shopping Mall] did not have a business lounge and was not advised of any other locations that had business lounge services. 6. The website states S Ltd provides unlimited access to a business lounge. In the hearing, S Ltd accepted its website and information including the terms and conditions did not include information about the services they could access. 7. S Ltd accepted an ordinary person would not know [Shopping Mall] did not have a business lounge and would not know they ha...