Search Results

1. BX v QD & Ors [2024] NZDT 792 (29 November 2024) [pdf, 237 KB]

   ...would have seen the warning signs of the issues that have been found. 12. The final witness was Mr UX. UX stated he had been working on the property next door and noted what appeared to be a leak in the deck. He did not however approach the former occupant of the house. 13. The vendors were QD, KD, FC and BN Ltd, as trustees of the C Family Trust. The house however had been occupied by QD’s 94 year father, FC Snr. Mr FC Snr had been a sole trustee when the house was purchase...

2. ED Ltd v TQ Ltd [2023] NZDT 312 (27 July 2023) [pdf, 221 KB]

   ...they contacted TQ Ltd and were advised that, due to price inflation over the long period of delay and changes in availability of materials, the pricing of the job would increase to $34,949.40+GST. ED Ltd was of the view that TQ Ltd was obliged to perform the contract at the quoted price and gave TQ Ltd an opportunity to proceed on that basis. 3. TQ Ltd declined to proceed and ED Ltd proposed repayment of its deposit plus a sum for damages summarised as being equivalent to 10% interest p...

3. DC v T Ltd [2018] NZDT 1401 (7 May 2018) [pdf, 208 KB]

   ...“not sure” or was not convinced of whose signature it was. b. SZ is correct that in his capacity as shareholder JH would not have been in a position to bind the company. However JH had more than one capacity. He was listed in the Exposition, a formal document certifying certain important matters of safety and responsibility to the Civil Aviation Authority, as both the Flight Operations Manager, and the Check and Training Manager. As Flight Operations Manager, according to paragra...

4. WO v KU [2021] NZDT 1676 (20 December 2021) [pdf, 201 KB]

   ...not entitled to claim $18,087.00. Accordingly, the claim is dismissed. Referee: L Fuli 1 Balfour v Balfour [1919] 2 KB 571. CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 3 of 4 Date: 20 December 2021 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 reh...

5. QX v XN Ltd [2024] NZDT 110 (16 April 2024) [pdf, 207 KB]

   ...service since it was purchased by the first owner. QX said the oil had been changed and he had done some routine checks, but accepted that there had not been a full service. There was some discussion about how often a full service should have been performed, and about the manufacturer’s guidelines for this. I do not consider that I need to make a finding on this because it was accepted that there had not been a full service of the motorhome at all since it was purchased new. 13. XN...

6. OD v JE [2024] NZDT 794 (13 November 2024) [pdf, 183 KB]

   ...had 11 previous owners, and was 23 years old at the time OD bought it. Thus, he said, its history was unknown and he could not have known of any problems with the car if, in fact, there had been any. He had simply stated honestly how the car had performed during the time he had owned it. [10] JE provided a letter from his wife, in which she stated that the car had run well during the period that the family had used it. He also provided a letter from his mechanic, KT, who had not seen th...

7. Apostolakis v Rennie (Strike-Out Application) 2017 NZHRRT 42 [pdf, 286 KB]

   ...(Strike-Out Application) [2017] NZHRRT 42.] 2 defendant is the daughter of Mr Damir De Polo who in 2006 was represented by Ms Rennie in proceedings in the Family Court. In those proceedings Mr De Polo sought a Protection Order against his former de facto partner, Mrs K Apostolakis, the plaintiff in the present proceedings. Ms Rennie was also acting for Mr De Polo in relationship property matters arising out of his relationship with Mrs Apostolakis. According to the statement of...

8. Deliu v New Zealand Law Society and National Standards Committee (Second Recusal Application) [2013] NZHRRT 12 [pdf, 122 KB]

   ...recusal application: [5.1] A fair-minded lay observer would not apprehend that a failure to refer to a title meant that the Tribunal as presently made up would not bring an impartial mind to the case. [5.2] There is no logical connection between the claimed disregard of title and any feared deviation by the Tribunal as presently constituted from dealing with the case on the merits. [5.3] The applicant too lightly throws the bias ball in the air – if his second recusal application w...

9. MZ v X Ltd [2023] NZDT 511 (16 October 2023) [pdf, 213 KB]

   ...be used, in the sum of $2,828.00. 3. The issues to be determined were as follows: a. Has X Ltd breached its contract with MZ, or has it breached either or both the Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 or the Fair Trading Act 1986 in respect of the form for self service purchases for flight bookings requesting “first name, last name”, in respect of cultures that put family or surnames first, and given or individual names last? b. Did X Ltd breach the guarantee that services are to be...

10. Auckland Standards Committee 3 v PL [2016] NZLCDT 6 [pdf, 114 KB]

    ...betterment. Discovery [21] The Tribunal has been obliged to turn its attention to the discovery required in the WH Tribunal proceedings. There were many procedural orders issued by the WH Tribunal regarding failures on the part of the claimant and requests for supplementary disclosure. All of these were reported by the law firm to I. This Tribunal finds that I was aware of his obligation to disclose the Joint Venture. In the event he did not instruct any partner or member of s...