Some decisions are published here by the judiciary from courts and tribunals. Not all decisions are published, and not all decisions can be found through our finder.

Find out more about using the decision finder. 

View the full list of where to find decisions for each court or tribunal.

Decisions for the High Court, Court of Appeal and Supreme Court can be found in the Judicial Decisions Online.

There are also tools to help you find publications or forms, as explained on the Document finders page.

Search results

743 items matching your search terms

  1. [2012] NZCA 254 CA150/2012 White v Reserve Bank [PDF, 36 KB]

    Leave to appeal is granted, 15 June 2012. Did the Employment Court fail to apply orthodox interpretation principles by failing to take into account the words “unless otherwise agreed in writing” in the applicants’ employment contracts and by failing to consider what was implicit in those words against the background of past dealings and the obligations of good faith that arise in the context of an employment contract? If yes, was the respondent required periodically to review the percentage of the total remuneration package that was deemed to be superable salary and to adjust the percentage having regard to the material revealed by the review?
  13. AFN v ZUI [2012] NZDT 187 (8 June 2012) [PDF, 95 KB]

    Nuisance / Applicant’s drain was damaged by what she believed was the Respondent’s rhododendron tree, and so she engaged a plumber to repair the drain in 2006 / in 2011, more damage in a different spot emerged / Held: Applicant failed to establish on balance of probabilities that the Respondent’s rhododendron tree created a nuisance and damaged her drains / instead, it could have been caused by tree roots in the nearby Council reserve / however, the Applicant established that the 2011 damage was caused by the Respondent’s rhododendron tree roots, that the Respondent did know or ought to have known about the nuisance in 2011, and that the damage caused by the tree roots was reasonably foreseeable / Respondent liable for only 70 per cent of the cost of repairing drain as the drain was old and required work regardless of the damage / Respondent to pay Applicant $653.79.
  21. AEM v ZVK [2012] NZDT 316 (1 June 2012) [PDF, 80 KB]

    Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / guarantee as to acceptable quality / Applicant claimed outstanding invoice from Respondent for sale of goods / Respondent counterclaimed for different goods supplied earlier and alleged these were deficient once installed / Applicant denied these were deficient and claimed he was not responsible for installation deficiencies / Held: disputed goods were supplied as ordered, accepted on delivery and installed by a third party contractor / Applicant complied with his side of contract and was not responsible for installation / Applicant entitled to payment for outstanding invoice / claim allowed, Respondent ordered to pay applicant $7,039.83.