Search Results

1. LC Ltd v XU Ltd [2024] NZDT 356 (21 May 2024) [pdf, 177 KB]

   ...to provide the footage as they considered it would not be helpful under the circumstances. 3. I am satisfied that LC Ltd were told where to park by BE, and that no specific timeframe for the unloading of tools was given. Is XU Ltd liable in negligence for the damage caused to LC Ltd’s vehicle? 4. The general law of negligence applies. Where damage has been caused to property, the conduct of the party responsible is culpable because it falls short of what a reasonable person w...

2. ABT Ltd v ZYJ Ltd [2013] NZDT 71 (5 June 2013) [pdf, 75 KB]

   ...reversing out of ABT’s premises, did the driver of the ZYJ truck drive negligently? (ii) Does the exclusion clause between the customer and ZYJ apply to ABT? (iii) What are the reasonable costs of repair? Law [7] When driving a vehicle, a driver has a duty to take reasonable care to avoid damaging property belonging to others. Any failure to do so breaches that duty and renders the driver liable for the cost of repairing the property. If the driver is an agent for t...

3. NQ v OS [2022] NZDT 109 (10 August 2022) [pdf, 91 KB]

   ...from the floor, and flying across the road during the storm? (c) If so, did the breach of duty cause the damage to the vehicle and was it foreseeable? (d) What is the reasonable cost to repair the vehicle? Did OS owe a duty of care? 4. In a negligence claim four elements must be proven. The first is the duty of care. A duty of care arises when parties are in close proximity to each other and it is reasonably foreseeable that if a standard of reasonable care is not adhered to the...

4. SA v TD & I Ltd [2021] NZDT 1646 (4 October 2021) [pdf, 139 KB]

   ...the costs claimed established? Did TD cause the collision? 3. I find that TD’s driving was a cause the collision because he attempted to pass SA’s car but was unable to complete the manoeuvre safely. 4. The relevant law is the law of negligence. Drivers must take reasonable care in operating their vehicle and are responsible for any reasonably foreseeable damage suffered as a result of a failure to do so. The duty to take reasonable care includes a duty to follow the Land Tra...

5. Canterbury Westland Standards Committee No. 1 v Grave [2016] NZLCDT 8 [pdf, 62 KB]

   ...Practitioner 2 DECISION OF THE NEW ZEALAND LAWYERS AND CONVEYANCERS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL AS TO PENALTY AND NAME SUPPRESSION Introduction [1] Mr Grave faced one charge, pleaded with three alternative levels of conduct – misconduct, negligence and unsatisfactory conduct. After negotiations with the Standards Committee, Mr Grave agreed to admit the charge at the level of negligence and this, with an agreed set of facts was put to the Tribunal, along with suggest...

6. QN & Ors v KN [2024] NZDT 29 (28 February 2024) [pdf, 148 KB]

   ...Is QN entitled to $3,223.99 for the costs of repairing the car? 10. KN did not dispute that he drove negligently and is liable for the cost of repairs to the car. The dispute was over the amount payable to QN. 11. The purpose of damages in negligence is to put the person who suffered the damage back in the position they would have been in had the negligent act not occurred. Losses claimed must arise from the negligent act, they cannot be too remote and there is a duty on a claiman...

7. QH & TH v SR [2023] NZDT 696 (21 December 2023) [pdf, 177 KB]

   ...reasonable and prudent driver is to go forward very slowly, poking the nose of the car out until it is possible to see whether anyone is coming along. It is not enough to simply assume that the right lane will be clear. I find no evidence of contributory negligence on the part of the applicant’s driver. What are the reasonable costs of remedy? [7] The applicant claims the cost of repair $7,261 and has supplied evidence to the respondent and the Tribunal supporting this claim. T...

8. CK & QK v XL [2024] NZDT 265 (25 January 2024) [pdf, 177 KB]

   ...entitled to claim $6,995.00 compensation? Did XL breach its duty to take reasonable care to prevent foreseeable incidents on [highway] by failing to sweep loose chip off the road and failing to warn road users to slow down? 3. QK claims that the negligent actions of XL resulted in damage to her car. To succeed in a claim of negligence, QK must prove that: a) XL owed a duty of care to her to take reasonable precautions to prevent harm to her car, and b) that XL failed to take rea...

9. QN v UN [2024] NZDT 197 (8 April 2024) [pdf, 99 KB]

   ...claim is dismissed. Reasons: 1. On 15 November 2023, QN went to UN to buy 2 half wine barrels that were on special. QN enlisted the help of a young male staff member of slight build to assist him in selecting, carrying the barrels to QN’s vehicle and loading them into the back. It was agreed they needed to be stacked to fit into the vehicle. 2. Apparently, the edge of the bottom barrel was not fully on the floor of the SUV vehicle and it slipped down on QN’s side and scra...

10. Evidence - Traffic - Minister for Children - Samantha McCarthy - Final [pdf, 238 KB]

    ...traffic to be low. These volumes represent less than 2% of the respective peak hour and 1% of the daily volumes on Weymouth Road, where the variance was found to be up to 10% across a week. 1.6. Such volumes are unlikely to be noticeable, with negligible adverse effects expected on the safety or efficiency of either the site access or Weymouth Road. 1.7. To assess potential car parking demand, I considered the maximum staffing level for the aforementioned future scenario alon...