Search Results

1. MM v B Ltd [2024] NZDT 406 (22 April 2024) [pdf, 195 KB]

   ...claim, namely that B Ltd is liable for the alarm system malfunctioning. That being the case second issue about compensation does not arise and MM’s claim fails. Referee: P Moses Date: 22 April 2024 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...

2. Hearn v Parklane Investments Limited [pdf, 39 KB]

   ...not for me to determine whether appeals are in or out of time nor to create uncertainty by not providing final decision on issues where appropriate. [48] I conclude that I do not have the powers to deal with matters in the way that the Council requests. If I did, there does not seem to be any good reason for changing the timing of the decision. Summary [49] In summary, this order makes no changes to the orders made against the third respondent, the Council. [50] Hayim...

3. Hill v Whimp [pdf, 158 KB]

   ...the question of quantum would be put aside at that stage and that I was to give my determination only on the question of liability, with the parties then deciding what steps might follow that decision. Accordingly Mr Taylor’s evidence has not formed part of this determination. [8] It should also be recorded that at the hearing I obtained the consent of the parties to a reasonable extension to the timing of the completion of this determination, pursuant to s 40(1)(b) of the Act....

4. NM & WM v CL & ES [2024] NZDT 896 (20 December 2024) [pdf, 295 KB]

   ...counterclaim are dismissed. Reasons: 1. CL and ES purchased a property from NM and WM. Settlement was on 31 May 2024, however CL and ES granted NM and WM a “licence to occupy the property” for an additional day following settlement. A “performance bond” of $3,000.00 was retained from settlement, which was to be released on Tuesday 3 June 2024 on the basis that everything was in order. 2. Settlement of the property occurred on 31 May 2024, but the bond was not released on...

5. EK v J Limited [2023] NZDT 471 (17 August 2023) [pdf, 194 KB]

   ...claim by EK for $4,828.71 is dismissed. 10. I find that the contract provided for one set of external stairs from level 1 to level 2 on the right- hand side. I make this finding for the following reasons: a) The Building Specification, that formed part of the contract, showed pricing for the house plan [design], plus additional items which included “external steps from level 1 to 2”. The price CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 3 of 5 for one set of external steps is $3,900.00....

6. Tsirakoff v Accident Compensation Corporation (Weekly Compensation) [2023] NZACC 148 [pdf, 331 KB]

   ...and 5 July 1994 record “back improving”. There are references to different claim numbers. 1996 to 2000 [13] The reporting shows Ms Tsirakoff sustained injuries in other body sites, as well as widespread generalised pain. There was a request for treatment made in February 1996 in relation to back pain following a car accident on 13 March 1994. There is a subsequent treatment request for the same injury, which indicates ongoing back pain, and a note that it was improving....

7. Langdon v ACC [2014] NZACA 9 [pdf, 71 KB]

   ...accident was made on 10 March 1990, fixed at $300.00 per week and paid up to 23 March 1990. Mr Langdon suffered a second period of incapacity from 7 September 1990, and his relevant earnings were fixed at $350.41 per week and 2 this amount formed the basis for calculating his subsequent ERC/weekly compensation entitlement. [4] After years of dispute and following a review of his ERC entitlements from 3 March 1990, on 24 November 2005 ACC fixed Mr Langdon’s relevant earnings...

8. DI v P Ltd & Ors [2024] NZDT 793 (26 September 2024) [pdf, 191 KB]

   ...not in existence when DI bought his house, his claim against P Ltd is also dismissed. Referee: C Hawes Date: 26 September 2024 Page 4 of 4 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 re...

9. GN & GO v LQ Ltd Power Company U [2022] NZDT 121 (24 August 2022) [pdf, 219 KB]

   ...neighbouring driveway. As that home was now in different ownership, and as there was no easement to convey fibre across the neighbour’s property, there was no legal right for the Applicants to connect to that drop box without significant cost and the formation of easements. 8. The only alternative option was to get Company D to create a new dropbox where the LQ builders had put the connection to. The cost of the new connection was $2,325.04 which had to be paid by the Applicants so...

10. MD v O Ltd [2021] NZDT 1347 (27 January 2021) [pdf, 197 KB]

    ...liable to the contracting party (s 256, CCLA). The contracting party is (relevantly) the consignor (sender of the goods) who enters a contract with the carrier (s 246, CCLA). 10. The general law of contract applies. A legally binding contract is formed when both parties intend to contract on agreed terms and intend for those terms to be legally binding. The terms of a contract are formed at the beginning, not at the end. What was agreed is looked at objectively, i.e. by looking at...