Search Results

1. FT v X Ltd [2024] NZDT 708 (20 August 2024) [pdf, 125 KB]

   ...careless, and that X Ltd is liable for the actions of its subcontractor. The disputed issue is whether the compensation paid properly reflects FT’s loss, or whether she is entitled to be fully compensated for the upgraded retaining wall. 15. Where negligence is proved, the purpose of compensation is to return the aggrieved party to the position they would have been in had the careless act not occurred. There may be occasions where this involves an element of betterment, e.g., where the...

2. QE v TA [2023] NZDT 791 (22 December 2023) [pdf, 91 KB]

   ...the cost of repairs. The issue to be determined is whether the costs claimed are reasonable to put QE back in the position she would have been had the collision not occurred. 3. If a driver damages another person’s car as a result of their negligence, they must pay the reasonable cost of putting the other person back in the position they would have been had the damage not occurred. 4. TA reversed into the driver’s side of QE’s car, causing some damage to both doors on that...

3. TG v E Ltd [2024] NZDT 647 (31 October 2024) [pdf, 168 KB]

   ...maintain the road network in the [region]. 3. The issues to be determined are: a) Did E Ltd breach a duty of care to road users? b) If so, what sum is payable in compensation to TG? Did E Ltd breach a duty of care to road users? 4. The tort of negligence applies when someone breaches a duty of care to another person causing foreseeable damage. E Ltd acknowledged that it owed a duty of care to motorists but denied that it breached its duty of care. 5. E Ltd’s investigation of th...

4. People discharged without conviction June 2018 [xlsx, 283 KB]

   ...offences since 2012/2013 is due to changes in offence categorisation for driving causing death offences. Prior to mid-2012 there were several offences which included driving causing death or injury, which were categorised in division 04: Dangerous or negligent acts endangering persons. When these offences were replaced with separate offences for driving causing death and driving causing injury, the new driving causing death offences were categorised in 01: Homicide and related offences. For m...

5. Adult conviction and sentencing statistics data highlights 2017 [pdf, 375 KB]

   ...charges for manufacturing or cultivating illicit drugs and 116 (3%) fewer convicted charges for dealing or trafficking illicit drugs in 2017. Also of note was another increase over the past year in the number of convicted charges for ‘dangerous/negligent operation (driving) of a vehicle’ (7% increase from 8,598 to 9,167 convicted charges), following continuous falls in the number of convicted charges from 2007 to 2015. While, ‘obtaining benefit by deception’ had the highest volu...

6. Allan v Christchurch City Council [pdf, 81 KB]

   ...principle.....................................................................................................................................24 Betterment- adjustment re targeted repairs.......................................................................................................25 VI. CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE.........................................................................................................26 VII. PROVEN CLAIM ....................................................

7. LCRO 205/2016 EK v IQ (15 October 2018) [pdf, 169 KB]

   ...Society Complaints Service (LSCS). [22] The substance of Mr EK’s complaint was allegation that Mr IQ had: (a) overcharged for work based on exaggerating hours that had been worked; (a) charged for work he was not instructed to do; (b) been negligent in dealing with the file (this is in relation to an email received by Mr IQ during the due diligence timeframe and not attended to for some days); 4 (c) lacked experience in the type of commercial structure Mr EK wanted to...

8. LCRO 123/2019 & 124/2019 MC v QK and QK v MC (3 March 2020) [pdf, 199 KB]

   ...complaint in Mrs QK’s name for the benefit of the third-party? [111] Mr MC does not consider that Mrs QK had any objection to him acting. It is his view that Ms ZN is driving the complaint, with purpose to assist in laying a foundation for a negligence claim. 19 [112] I do not propose to go beyond the complaint and review documents and speculate on whether Mrs QK is genuinely promoting the complaint that is advanced in her name. [113] The complaint was filed on 18 Augus...

9. AML phase II - Business compliance impacts [pdf, 491 KB]

   ...contained in the report. 4. The reader agrees that, to the maximum extent permitted by law, Deloitte, its partners, principals, employees and agents exclude and disclaim all liability (including without limitation, in contract, in tort including in negligence, or under any enactment), and shall not be liable in respect of any loss, damage or expense of any kind (including indirect or consequential loss) which are incurred as a result of the reader’s use of this report, or caused...

10. Phase II Anti-money laundering reforms - Business Compliance Impacts [pdf, 495 KB]

    ...contained in the report. 4. The reader agrees that, to the maximum extent permitted by law, Deloitte, its partners, principals, employees and agents exclude and disclaim all liability (including without limitation, in contract, in tort including in negligence, or under any enactment), and shall not be liable in respect of any loss, damage or expense of any kind (including indirect or consequential loss) which are incurred as a result of the reader’s use of this report, or caused...