Search Results

1. [2014] NZEmpC 136 Rainbow Falls Organic Farm Ltd v Rockell [pdf, 128 KB]

   ...McKenzie lived in Hong Kong, although he travelled to Kerikeri from time to time and visited the farm. It is apparent that the farm had enjoyed a productive phase during a previous farm manager’s time on it, although there were issues with the performance of the farm manager who held the role just prior to Mr Rockell’s appointment. That relationship had come to an end after about 12 months. It was around this time that Mr McKenzie met with Mr Rockell and discussed the possibi...

2. QS v DD Ltd [2022] NZDT 27 (20 April 2022) [pdf, 128 KB]

   ...problems with the electric windows not opening and a bent aerial. On 3 August 2021 the vehicle broke down and was not driveable so was towed to a relative’s house nearby – that problem turned out to be transmission failure. QS completed a DD claim form the following day. She received confirmation of receipt of the claim form from DD on 11 August 2022 and in that email DD advised her to have the vehicle assessed by any MTA Approved mechanic under the mechanical breakdown insurance sh...

3. CC v SN & KM [2023] NZDT 475 (25 August 2023) [pdf, 167 KB]

   ...contract in terms of her original proposal, but more an acknowledgement that work on the fence of some nature would be needed at some stage, whether it be a repair or rebuild. 15. I find there was not an enforceable contract between the parties formed on 11 January 2023. CC’s claim is dismissed. 16. Consequently it is not necessary to consider any remedy CC and KM had. CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 4 of 6 Counterclaim Does SN’s counterclaim of 10 February rely...

4. SC v CX [2022] NZDT 116 (2 August 2022) [pdf, 204 KB]

   ...contacted the Disputes Tribunal and advised that due to his absence, he was happy for me to make a decision based on the existing evidence, stating he had nothing more to add. 4. CX was advised that SC had asked me to make a decision based on the information before me. He was asked if he was happy for me to do this. He agreed. 5. Both parties were advised I would be making a decision based on the information they provided as they had declined the opportunity for a further hearing....

5. LG & G Ltd v QN & IM [2024] NZDT 841 (9 December 2024) [pdf, 179 KB]

   ...determine whether the amount claimed is fair and reasonable. Was the dispute settled by the Respondents’ payment on 26 July 2024? 8. The law of contract applies. When the parties to a dispute reach an agreement to resolve a dispute, a contract is formed between them which stands alone and is separate to any previous contract between them. If the parties comply with the terms of the settlement, the dispute is resolved, and both parties are bound be that settlement and neither party...

6. X Ltd v K Ltd [2023] NZDT 284 (25 July 2023) [pdf, 93 KB]

   ...at the time they were stolen, K Ltd is not required to compensate X Ltd for breach of the contract, because I have not found that any breach has occurred. Referee: M Wilson Date: 25 July 2023 Page 3 of 3 Information for Parties Rehearings You can apply for a rehearing if you believe that something prevented the proper decision from being made: for example, the relevant information was not available at the time. If you wish to apply for a rehe...

7. BI & SI v BA [2023] NZDT 142 (2 May 2023) [pdf, 154 KB]

   ...the cars that the Applicants understood they were purchasing. 3. At the first hearing I adjourned to allow the Applicants further time to obtain documents from the Police file. At the second hearing the Applicants told me that they had further information which they wanted the Tribunal to consider, I allowed the Applicants further time to send in these documents, which they did. I confirm that I have considered all the evidence filed by the Applicants in determining this matter. 4....

8. DN v NS [2024] NZDT 336 (23 May 2024) [pdf, 127 KB]

   ...claim. NS has not been in contact with the Tribunal. I attempted to call NS but was unable to reach him. NS was posted the notice of hearing in April 2024 and a reminder was emailed to him prior to the hearing. I am satisfied that NS was properly informed of the claim, the hearing date and time, and the matter could proceed in his absence. 4. The issues to be resolved are: a. Did NS cause damage to DN’s car? b. If so, is DN entitled to claim $3,252.34? Did NS cause damage to DN�...

9. Roberts v Accident Compensation Corporation (Weekly Compensation) [2022] NZACC 208 [pdf, 192 KB]

   ...that Mr Roberts had been employed by New Zealand Forest Service Nursery from “?Aug 1986” for three weeks. This certificate described him as being unemployed, and with “TAPS Salvation Army Cambridge? From Nov 1986 to Accident”.1 An ACC Information Consent Form dated 9 June 1987, signed by Mr Roberts’ mother, described him as unemployed. [5] On 30 January 2001, Mr Colin Higgins noted in a letter that he was a used car dealer and did not employ full-time staff. However...

10. BC v ACC (Interest on backdated weekly compensation) [2024] NZACC 67 [pdf, 232 KB]

    ...third scenario outlined in Miller. The Court finds the date as to when all necessary information was received enabling the Corporation to make decision, is 11 February 2021, having regard to the facts that follow. [23] The Corporation received the request for the payment of weekly compensation in May 2019. It follows, the “all information” date cannot be earlier than May 2019, because that is the date when the claim for weekly compensation was lodged. The claim for weekly comp...