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

  3. ACE v ZXZ [2012] NZDT 136 (19 December 2012) [PDF, 69 KB]

    Contract / quantum meruit / faulty medicines / Respondent faxed 900 New Zealand pharmacies including Applicant instructing recall of a suspected faulty medication / same recall between another pharmacy and Respondent decided in District Court / Ian Johnson Pharmacy Ltd v GlaxoSmithKline NZ Ltd DC Manukau, CIV-2010-092-1947, 26 September 2011 / Applicant claimed for its time and costs spent effecting the recall / Held: District Court decision acted as a precedent for this claim / Applicant entitled to payment for services in contract or alternatively on quantum meruit basis / fax sent to Applicant constituted a contract and services requested were over and above those normally provided / Applicant was entitled to reasonable payment for its services / claim allowed, Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $253.00.
  8. AAP v ZZM [2012] NZDT 38 (15 November 2012) [PDF, 53 KB]

    Jurisdiction / Overseas parties / Applicant is an overseas company based in Australia / Respondent is a New Zealand company based in Christchurch with Australian clients / agreement between parties that Respondent would service some of the Applicant’s Australian-based clients / no written terms to the agreement / Respondent paid the Applicant in Australian dollars / Applicant sought to recover a number of outstanding invoices / the Disputes Tribunals Act 1988 and Disputes Tribunals Rules 1989 entitled any person to commence proceedings in the Tribunal in the prescribed form / no issue of enforcement when Applicant resides overseas / District Court has held that the Tribunal has jurisdiction to hear a claim by an overseas applicant / according to principles of conflict of laws, claim should be heard in accordance with Australian law / Disputes Tribunal not able to apply Australian law / claim struck out for lack of jurisdiction. 
  10. Zagorski v Wilkinson Building and Construction Limited [2012] NZWHT Auckland 47 [PDF, 129 KB]

    Zagorski v Wilkinson Building and Construction Limited [2012] NZWHT Auckland 47 costs decision TRI 2010-100-000112/DBH 6291. Decision date 15 November 2012. See also the Zagorski v Wilkinson Building and Construction Limited [2012] NZWHT Auckland 4 final determination, Zagorski v Wilkinson Building and Construction Limited [2012] NZWHT Auckland 38 decision on remedial scope, Zagorski v Wilkinson Building and Construction Limited [2012] NZWHT Auckland 43 decision on quantum, High Court Zagorski v Wilkinson Building and Construction Limited [2012] NZWHT Auckland 43 appeal decision CIV-2012-404-1123, and Zagorski v Wilkinson Building and Construction Limited [2012] NZWHT Auckland 49 amended costs decision.