Ministry of Justice

Search Results

1. CAC 20007 v Marshall [2013] NZREADT 72 [pdf, 20 KB]

   ...down a telephone conference for 30 July 2013. The defendant advised us that he refused to attend that telephone conference and he did not. At that telephone conference, we directed that the charge is to be heard by us on 4 October 2013 and we made consequential timetabling orders. In relation to the interim suspension application, our Chairman queried whether an interim order is necessary in light of the defendant’s advice that he is not currently employed and does not wish to take p...

2. SM v D Ltd [2023] NZDT 155 (10 May 2023) [pdf, 229 KB]

   ...the applicants to bring the claim within the jurisdiction of the Disputes Tribunal. CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 2 of 4 5. The issues to be determined are: • Did D Ltd carry out its service with reasonable care and skill as per the Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA)? • Was any failure of CGA guarantee one of substantial character? • What remedy is available to SM/GN? Did D Ltd carry out its service with reasonable care and skill as per the Consumer Guarantees...

3. LQ Ltd v JN & BN [2022] NZDT 2 (14 February 2022) [pdf, 224 KB]

   ...excessive for the work done. 5. The issues to be resolved are: (a) Is it more likely than not that JI removed the fuse? (b) If so, how much is payable for the work done? Is it more likely than not that JI removed the fuse? 6. The Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 provides that a service should be provided with reasonable skill and care (s28). There is no dispute that the work done on the cylinder was done properly. However, the responsibility to act with due care relates n...

4. EP v UK LTD & UKU LTD 2016 NZDT 893 (7 December 2016) [pdf, 137 KB]

   ...Tribunals Act 1988. Issues [7] The issues to determine are: a) Did EP have a contractual relationship with one or both respondents? b) Did UK Ltd perform its car repair service in a reasonable time as per section 30 of the Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (‘CGA’)? c) Did UK Ltd perform its service with reasonable care and skill (section 28, CGA)? d) Was any failure a failure of substantial character (section 36, CGA)? e) What remedy is available to EP? Did EP...

5. QN v C Ltd [2022] NZDT 209 (22 May 2022) [pdf, 216 KB]

   ...value of approximately $700 and it is unreasonable for the applicant to claim repairs of approximately $3,000.00. The respondent claims this repair cost is not commensurate with the value of the work contracted for. [20] The applicant relies upon the Consumer Guarantees Act. [21] The transaction is governed by the law of contract and the Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (the Act) because the goods and services supplied by the respondent to the applicant were of the kind ordinarily required...

6. BM v OZ Ors [2024] NZDT 109 (5 February 2024) [pdf, 215 KB]

   ...were present. Did OZ in trade make a false or misleading representation that the Unit had a 6 year warranty or otherwise engage in misleading and deceptive conduct, or supply a Unit that was not of an acceptable quality? 6. Section 6 of the Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA) provides that where goods are supplied to a consumer there is a guarantee that the goods are of an acceptable quality, and where goods fail to comply with this guarantee, a consumer has a right of redress aga...

7. NT v SQ [2023] NZDT 498 (31 October 2023) [pdf, 176 KB]

   ...the car had no issues. Since the car is uneconomic to repair, damages are measured by the difference between the actual value of the car and the expected value of the car in the condition as represented. The buyer can also recover any foreseeable consequential losses. 11. The estimated value of the car if sold for parts is $600 to $650. The higher figure is applicable since the buyer bears the onus of proving the amount of his claim. Assuming the purchase price represented the value if t...

8. KQ & OS v TN Ltd [2024] NZDT 244 (25 March 2024) [pdf, 221 KB]

   ...TN Ltd says it provided them to try to make up for any shortcomings in the decorations for the [pre-wedding event 1], and compensation for stress on the evening in question. 3. The issues to be decided are: a. Has there been a breach of the Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 by TN Ltd? b. If so, what remedy is appropriate? c. Is TN Ltd entitled to any further payment from KQ and OS? Has there been a breach of the Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 by TN Ltd? 4. On the basis of the eviden...

9. ACG Ltd v ZXX Ltd [2011] NZDT 157 (9 May 2011) [pdf, 112 KB]

   ...respect, the argument is not whether or not the product was fit for purpose but rather whether or not the product supplied was in fact the product that was ordered in the first place. [10] The bulk of ACG Ltd’s claim for compensation comprises consequential losses arising out of rebottling affected product. RT argued that ZXX Ltd’s terms and conditions, which ACG Ltd agreed to when it applied for a trading account with ZXX Ltd, expressly excludes liability for indirect and c...

10. TH v BG Ltd [2019] NZDT 1515 (12 August 2019) [pdf, 202 KB]

    ...care and skill, and in accordance with all laws and legal requirements? Was it reasonably fit for purpose? If not, was it a substantial failure? b) What sum, if any, is payable or refundable to TH? Is the cost of her structural engineering report a consequential loss? To what extent would it need to have been done anyway? CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 2 of 4 Was the work done with reasonable care and skill, and in accordance with all laws and legal requirements? Was it reasonably fit...