Search Results

1. BS v NT [2025] NZDT 51 (13 March 2025) [pdf, 188 KB]

   ...athlete and receive discounted rates in exchange for promoting BS as her trainer and allowing photographs and videos to be displayed. NT accepted she was a sponsored athlete receiving a reduced rate, but did not consider she had been adequately informed about any obligations she had. 3. BS initially invoiced NT the sum of $735.00, of which $635.00 was paid. BS now claims a further $1,025.00, being the non-discounted rate for her services on the basis that she did not receive any prom...

2. LI v KC [2025] NZDT 115 (26 February 2025) [pdf, 193 KB]

   ...CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 2 of 4 road includes— (a) a street; and (b) a motorway; and (c) a beach; and (d) a place to which the public have access, whether as of right or not; and (e) all bridges, culverts, ferries, and fords forming part of a road or street or motorway or a place referred to in paragraph (d); and (f) all sites at which vehicles may be weighed for the purposes of the Act or any other enactment 9. I consider the forecourt and driveway of a petrol

3. Kumandan v REAA & Paul [2012] NZREADT 15 [pdf, 206 KB]

   ...she told the Tribunal had a blank space at the bottom where the vendor’s solicitor would sign, date and return them to Harcourts. [19] Ms Whitney told the Tribunal that she did not hear from Mr Naidu and asked Mr Kumandan to get the confirmation forms signed. She said “he told me that he was going to see Mr Naidu and so would get them signed”. She said that one or two days later Mr Kumandan returned the two files to her with the signed acknowledgements – these documents are Ex...

4. [2013] NZEmpC 188 Hook v Stream Group (NZ) Pty Ltd [pdf, 124 KB]

   ...this reason told him that he would not be required to work out the period of notice. [2] Mr Hook contends that he was constructively dismissed. Mr Hook filed a personal grievance with the Employment Relations Authority (the Authority) claiming unjustified constructive dismissal, together with a claim for unjustified disadvantage. His grievance was dismissed. 1 The claim [3] Mr Hook has challenged the Authority’s determination on a de novo basis. The sole relief...

5. [2012] NZEmpC 130 CPC (New Zealand) Ltd v Dunlop [pdf, 77 KB]

   ...they were not breaching the terms of our employment agreement and our arrangements for a friendly exit. ... Therefore all the time and cost incurred for John [Tannahill] is a direct result of the other party’s failure to provide information as requested, and of course a function of their attempt to succeed with a substantial alternative claim. [7] Mr Parbhu also made a number of other allegations against Mr Dunlop and his counsel, Mr Tannahill, and he attached to his submission...

6. ML v KD [2023] NZDT 757 (13 December 2023) [pdf, 190 KB]

   ...encountered difficulties starting the Car; with battery reliability; and with dashboard warning lights appearing. I accept ML’s evidence she obtained an initial diagnostic check some 5 days after purchase, which indicated a range of faults. This information was passed onto KD, however after some initial assistance, KD stopped responding to messages. ML sought legal advice and obtained a more detailed diagnostic report from DI. This noted cylinders misfiring and the need for alternato...

7. CL & HD v T Ltd & S Ltd [2023] NZDT 72 (14 February 2023) [pdf, 223 KB]

   ...report. I find that the cost of this report is a consequential loss claimable under the CGA in this case. Therefore, S Ltd must pay CL and HD, $20,348.30. Referee: Ms Gayatri Jaduram Date: 14 February 2023 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...

8. SX v Q Ltd & TX [2024] NZDT 112 (9 February 2024) [pdf, 196 KB]

   ...management company but Q Ltd repeatedly failed/refused to do so. 14. The day before the first hearing on 5 October 2023, Q Ltd made a substantial written submission, which included multiple inspection reports that SX had never seen before, in a format inconsistent with previous reports. 15. SX files this claim seeking $25,524.32 for a partial refund of management fees and damages for multiple breaches of contract. 16. TX was joined as a second Respondent after the first hearing d...

9. NQ v TN & P Ltd [2023] NZDT 278 (1 August 2023) [pdf, 233 KB]

   ...of the agreement; and how the consumer may cancel the agreement. 9. [NQ and husband] were not provided with a quote. An invoice was sent to them after works commenced, after the first payment had been made. The invoice did not contain any information about their rights to cancel the contract at any time, nor were they advised orally of their rights. 10. NN, director of P Ltd, and TN, salesperson, attended the first hearing on 28 April 2023. They stated [NQ and husband] were advi...

10. BL & DL v L Ltd & V Ltd [2023] NZDT 304 (9 August 2023) [pdf, 191 KB]

    ...defect so that it is not of acceptable quality and accordingly they are not entitled to return the umbrella and be refunded the purchase price. Referee: K Cowie DTR Date: 9 August 2023 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...