Search Results

1. BC v TG [2021] NZDT 1636 (13 October 2021) [pdf, 105 KB]

   ...are as follows: a. Was TG responsible for the collision? b. If so, are the costs claimed reasonable to put BC back in the position he would have been had the collision not occurred. Was TG responsible for the collision? 4. Under the law of negligence all drivers owe other road users a duty of care. Drivers must take care not to drive in a manner that causes damage to another vehicle. The Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004 (LTR) states the rules that all drivers must abide by in...

2. MB v TX & EX [2023] NZDT 386 (16 August 2023) [pdf, 233 KB]

   ...heard by another Referee. The claim was dismissed as the Referee found the taxi driver not liable for the actions of his passenger. 6. MB now claims in the Disputes Tribunal against both TX and EX. The issues to be determined are: i. Was EX negligent when opening the car door? If so, is he liable to compensate MB for his losses? ii. Is TX liable for the losses? CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 2 of 3 iii. Have the losses been proven? Was EX negligent when opening the car doo...

3. CY v K Ltd [2025] NZDT 64 (20 February 2025) [pdf, 183 KB]

   ...that it was a nail from the site that became embedded into his vehicle causing a flat left front tyre on 26 February 2024. 2. CY claims $1033.85 for a replacement tyre. 3. The issues identified to be determined are: a. Did the company negligently drop a nail onto CY’s driveway causing damage to his tyre? b. If so, what are the reasonable costs associated with the damage? 4. Evidence was heard from both parties initially by teleconference, and then a face to face heari...

4. MJ v CB [2023] NZDT 130 (9 March 2023) [pdf, 99 KB]

   ...Ltd have filed a counterclaim, the Tribunal can make a binding determination. 5. All parties attended the hearing. MJ was represented by her father with the Tribunal’s consent. Who caused the collision? 6. The relevant law is the law of negligence. Road users must take care not to drive or ride in a way that causes damage to other vehicles or property. The Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004 (“LTR”) explains the rules that apply to road users. The relevant rules applied to...

5. MI v EG [2023] NZDT 194 (23 June 2023) [pdf, 188 KB]

   ...prove he has incurred that his insurer is entitled to be compensated for? Did EG breach his duty of care by passing on the left of a vehicle in a lane of traffic or by occupying a lane of traffic that was not available to him? 5. The law of negligence imposes a duty on everyone to ensure that a person does not damage another person’s property as a result of how they operate their vehicle. 6. A lane is defined in the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004 to include a cycle lan...

6. ZG v DD Ltd & GT [2023] NZDT 119 (30 June 2023) [pdf, 118 KB]

   ...the act and what he was authorised to do, so that the company is vicariously liable? c. What, if any, reasonable costs associated with the collision ought to be paid? Was GT responsible for the collision? 5. The relevant law is the tort of negligence, which applies when someone breaches a duty of care to another person causing foreseeable damage. Drivers have a duty of care towards the owners of vehicles or other property in the vicinity not to cause damage to that property. 6....

7. UL v TS [2024] NZDT 302 (27 March 2024) [pdf, 131 KB]

   ...CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 2 of 3 b. If not, did she cause the damage? c. If so, what remedy is appropriate? Did TS take reasonable care not to cause damage to UL’s vehicle in a situation when she owed him a duty of care? 8. The law of negligence states that where parties owe a duty of care to others they must take reasonable care not to cause damage to them. 9. I accept that TS owed UL a duty of care. Although I note her point that she was mowing her own lawns on her ow...

8. All charges and convicted charges December 2018 [xlsx, 874 KB]

   ...offences 982 821 956 972 1,270 1,289 1,491 1,774 1,977 2,202 2,272 2,936 3,858 4,887 5,195 4,995 5,260 4,828 4,680 4,006 3,839 4,068 4,395 4,819 4,343 4,509 4,918 4,474 4,655 4,826 5,372 5,023 5,524 5,883 5,244 5,707 5,502 5,501 5,552 04: Dangerous or negligent acts endangering persons 15,069 18,581 20,159 20,956 22,302 22,367 24,148 25,476 24,507 24,427 22,449 22,867 21,474 19,240 19,438 22,067 20,717 18,446 19,659 18,585 17,221 16,723 17,716 17,954 18,848 19,223 20,265 21,756 21,576 20,579 1...

9. IC v EI [2025] NZDT 112 (13 February 2025) [pdf, 198 KB]

   ...fast? c. Is X Ltd estopped from pursuing the current claim against EI? d. Are the repair costs claimed reasonable? Did EI cause the damage by failing to take reasonable care and failing to give way when turning right? 7. Under the law of negligence, drivers have a duty of care to other road users including to take care not to drive in a manner that causes damage to another vehicle. The Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004 (LTR) explains rules that all road users must abide by in...

10. MU v OL [2023] NZDT 698 (14 December 2023) [pdf, 203 KB]

    ...speeding, and that the cause of the collision was a failure on OL’s part to ensure that the way was clear before attempting to continue his ‘backing’ manoeuvre. If so, what is the remedy? 18. The normal measure of damages for a claim in negligence is to restore the wronged party to the position they were in before the negligent damage occurred. 19. MU provided a copy off an estimate from [vehicle repair company] which includes labour and second hand parts to repair his da...