Search Results

1. AY Ltd v ZB Ltd [2014] NZDT 676 (26 September 2014) [pdf, 16 KB]

   ...and that all components were made on a CNC machine. [9] The most important and relevant of all the evidence is that ZB Limited themselves took over the construction of the kitset for AY Limited’s client as a result of the dispute, after various forms of assistance were offered to AY Limited and the dispute could not be resolved. The work has recently been completed and fully signed off by Council without there having been any changes to the components of the kitset originally suppl...

2. Sheeran v Accident Compensation Corporation (Impairment Assessment) [2024] NZACC 130 (30 July 2024) [pdf, 231 KB]

   ............................................................................................................................... [3] Facts ............................................................................................................................ [4] The Claim ............................................................................................................ [5] Lump Sum Application .........................................................................................

3. [2017] NZEmpC 71 Stormont v Peddle Thorp Aitken Ltd [pdf, 497 KB]

   ...Stormont says, and I accept, that Mr Goldie reached an agreement with her as to revenue ($473,000) and direct costs ($166,000). Applying these figures would lead to a gross profit of $307,000, 20 per cent of which equals $61,400 (gross). This forms the basis of the claim for a bonus of $61,400. Mr Forrest agreed in evidence that he had never been asked to re-do his calculations to reflect the figures agreed between Ms Stormont and Mr Goldie. [22] On 15 January 2014 Mr Goldie...

4. [2015] NZEmpC 130 Scarborough v Micron Security Products Ltd [pdf, 166 KB]

   ...The plaintiff filed a document entitled “Application Regarding Matters of Law” on 10 February. The document set out the reasons why Miss Scarborough considered that the Court should refer the matter back to the Authority; advised that she had requested an investigation into her dismissal by the Ministry of Social Development; contended that the Authority member had not carried out a thorough investigation and did not have material evidence to support her determination; and that...

5. Y v Xue [2015] NZIACDT 6 (13 February 2015) [pdf, 199 KB]

   ...a referral under s 48 of the Immigration Advisers Licensing Act 2007 BY The Registrar of Immigration Advisers Registrar Between S Y and R Y Complainants AND Jia (Christina) Xue Adviser No information identifying the complainants to be published DECISION REPRESENTATION: Registrar: Mr A Dumbleton, lawyer, Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, Auckland Complainants: Mr A Tsang, Prestige Lawyers, Auckland...

6. C Ltd v KQ [2022] NZDT 1 (14 March 2022) [pdf, 106 KB]

   ...a house she was selling. Unfortunately goods supplied for the purpose were stolen during the staging. C LTD lodged a claim with their insurer. The insurance payment to C LTD was $15,941.92 after the deduction of the $2,500.00 excess. C LTD requested KQ to pay the excess, but she declined. The claim is for the $2,500.00 excess to be paid by KQ. 2. C LTD provided a quote for the staging contract and is relying on the ‘Terms’ supplied with that quote. The last term states...

7. TN v PO Ltd [2023] NZDT 570 (16 November 2023) [pdf, 186 KB]

   ...on the companies’ genuine website alerting users to the fraudulent use of the company names on [social media] by person/s unknown. 3. The only evidence about who TN might actually have been dealing with through [online marketplace] is in the form of a photograph sent to TN by the seller, of a man holding his photo ID drivers’ license next to his face. The man on the drivers’ license and the man in the photograph sent with the license appear to be the same person, but of course it...

8. Hartley v Balemi [pdf, 401 KB]

   ...plaster cladding has resulted in rot and damage to internal linings”. They were claiming for the estimated costs of repairs to remedy the problems at a figure of $300,000.00. 4.2 As a part of the preparations for the hearing, the Owners were requested to provide more details and particulars about their claims. This was done before the respondents were required to file their Responses pursuant to section 28 of the WHRS Act. The Owners identified a list of the problems with the...

9. LCRO 207/2015 CA v BE (21 August 2018) [pdf, 205 KB]

   ...that are first raised at the review stage of the proceedings. The Parties’ Arguments [34] Mr ZK identified Mrs CA’s main concern, (described by him as her “highest point of objection”) as concern that Mr BE had refused to comply with request to ensure that his client’s complaints were kept confidential. As this argument was advanced, it appeared to be the case that it was being suggested that Mr BE had given indication of his intention to interview potential witnesses...

10. MLC - Form 16 - Notice of proceedings [pdf, 75 KB]

    Page 1 For more information visit www.justice.govt.nz/courts/maori-land-court MLC 11/14 - 11 The Māori Land Court of New Zealand / Māori Appellate Court of New Zealand (Please select the name of the Māori Land Court District in which some or all of the lands or the subject matter of the application is located) Please select one District Taitokerau Waikato Maniapoto Waiariki Tairāwhiti Tākitimu Aotea Te Waipounamu TO: .................................................................