Search Results

1. ST v L Ltd [2025] NZDT 149 (4 May 2025) [pdf, 197 KB]

   ...difficulty in determining how damage was caused because it is unclear, if there was damage to the cars, how that damaged was caused. c. I acknowledge the invoice ST provided from [Mechanic]. However, this invoice does not provide the necessary information regarding the cause of the issues that are listed on the invoice. I accept that ST took the [Vehicle 1] to [Mechanic], but I do not have evidence that shows the car was taken there because of work completed by L Ltd (this in contras...

2. [2013] NZEmpC 18 Pathways Health Ltd v Moxon [pdf, 112 KB]

   ...psychology and social work and was employed by the plaintiff in 2005 as a registered health professional. [3] In August 2009, the plaintiff raised concerns with the defendant about her conduct. These ultimately led to the defendant receiving a formal warning in April 2010. The defendant raised a personal grievance which was lodged with the Authority. In addition to remedies for the personal grievance, the defendant also sought reimbursement of her costs of representation in the i...

3. DQ v UP [2022] NZDT 211 (9 December 2022) [pdf, 172 KB]

   ...‘BS’. DQ received BS from UP on or about 3 September 2021 when he was around eight weeks of age. 2. DQ says that BS has two significant physical health issues which were diagnosed while he was still a young puppy, that is, an antebrachial limb deformity with carpal valgus in the left front leg, and double hip dysplasia. The diagnoses were provided to DQ by T Veterinary Hospital (“T Vets”), and by BX a specialist small animal surgeon from ABC University who has had two consultat...

4. Panchalingam v Accident Compensation Corporation (Weekly Compensation) [2023] NZACC 196 [pdf, 185 KB]

   ...at: Wellington/Whanganui-a-tara by AVL Appearances: The Appellant is self-represented F Becroft for the Accident Compensation Corporation (“the Corporation”) Judgment: 4 December 2023 RESERVED JUDGMENT OF JUDGE P R SPILLER [Claim for weekly compensation – ss 103(2), Schedule 1, cl 32, Accident Compensation Act 2001 (“the Act”)] Introduction [1] This is an appeal from the decision of a Reviewer dated 19 April 2023. The Reviewer dismissed an application fo...

5. Featherby v Accident Compensation Corporation (Revocation of Cover) [2025] NZACC 110 (9 July 2025) [pdf, 189 KB]

   ...4th and 5th ray amputation. Dr Wells recorded that Mr Featherby “now comes forward for skin grafting for wound coverage. Further surgery for right foot split thickness skin graft to aid wound healing”. [7] On 17 January 2024, an ACC injury claim form was filed by Dr Caitlin Orr- Walker, GP, for Mr Featherby’s accident on 15 November 2023, with the injury described as “R) foot laceration leading to non-healing foot wound and cellulitis requiring 4th and 5th ray amputation”...

6. OIA-120191.pdf [pdf, 861 KB]

   Legal Services Commissioner Justice Centre I 19 Aitken Street I DX SX10125 I Wellington T 04 918 8800 I F 04 918 8820 lsc@justice.govt.nz 30 April 2025 Ref: OIA 120191 Tēnā koe Official Information Act request: Legal aid data Thank you for your email of 11 March 2025, requesting legal aid data on the preparation of PAL 1 cases, under the Official Information Act 1982 (the Act). Specifically, you requested: Please provide for each year, for the last five years, the...

7. LCRO 17/2014 SM v TR and DH [pdf, 146 KB]

   ...attached to the letter of engagement include reference to the way fees will be calculated and charged, and explains that any applicable estimate, fixed fee, or hourly rates will be included in the letter of engagement. Mr DH says no estimate was requested or provided. [5] In May 2011 SM terminated the retainer apparently because it had concerns over costs and the likelihood of recovery from the defendants, and changed lawyers. When Mr DH’s fees were paid, he passed the files on...

8. Tomov v Auckland Council [2012] NZWHT Auckland 34 [pdf, 221 KB]

   ...the document signed by Mr Thomas dated 19 August 2003, was subsequently endorsed with a building consent number (20022485) and signed as “okay” on 22 September 2003. There is no evidence that the Council declined to accept this document or requested any other document from the developer or ABC. 18 [59] The Council carried out final building inspections on 7 November 2003 and 3 December 2003. A CCC was issued on 4 December 2003. [60] Ms Divich submits tha...

9. [2011] NZLCDT 9 Canterbury Standards Committee v X [pdf, 197 KB]

   ...knew, at the relevant times, that Mr S had died in 2003. [42] Dealing now with the allegation in support of the misconduct charge that the quantum of the invoice of 14 September 2007 was not justifiable either in relation to work actually performed and/or as a reasonable fee incurred in the administration of the estate. [43] The invoice was for $21,000 plus GST and disbursements. It was said to arise as a result of time spent (175 hours) trying to locate two bequest beneficia...

10. HT v CJ Ltd [2019] NZDT 1508 (2 October 2019) [pdf, 181 KB]

    ...witness to the conversation, HT’s account is accepted as the best evidence of what was discussed. 7. The terms of a contract are generally determined by agreement at the time of the contract. A contract need not be in writing; an agreement can be formed verbally or inferred from the parties’ conduct. In this situation, it was understood that the detail of the cover would be contained in the policy document, but the basic contract was already formed before the document was received. I...