Search Results

1. NP v LO & Ors [2024] NZDT 687 (26 August 2024) [pdf, 243 KB]

   ...or to allow NP to run a business? e. If there was wrongful termination or a breach, what is the remedy? Who is the contract between? CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 2 of 5 7. The relevant law is contract law. A legally binding contract is formed when both parties intend to contract on agreed terms and intend for those terms to be legally binding. A contract can only be enforced against the parties to the contract, so it is important to determine who the parties are in this situ...

2. Holland & Ors as Trustees of the Harbourview Trust v Auckland City Council [pdf, 258 KB]

   ...to the architects engaged to prepare remedial plans and Kaizon Limited was engaged to prepare indicative costings and manage the tender process. Kaizon Limited has also been employed to supervise the remedial work which is being undertaken by Forme. Remedial work commenced in late October 2009 and is ongoing. The claim for remedial work is based primarily on the amounts in the successful tender documents. WHAT ARE THE DEFECTS THAT CAUSED THE LEAKS? [12] Phillip Brown,...

3. Notice-of-Claim-TCRA [pdf, 2.2 MB]

   For more information visit www.justice.govt.nz/tribunals Taxation and Charities Review Authority TCRA no: Page 1 For more information visit www.justice.govt.nz/tribunals TRA 11/13 - 1 Notice of Claim Taxation Review Authorities Regulations 1998, Regulation 8 In the Matter of [Specify the appropriate Act(s), for example the Income Tax Act 2004, the Income Tax Act 2007, or the Goods and Services Tax Act 1985] Between [Full name, address, and occupation] Disputant And The Commissioner...

4. Madoc v Accident Compensation Corporation (Revocation of Cover) [2023] NZACC 144 [pdf, 306 KB]

   ...fusion with instrumentation and/or PLIF1 level and L5/S1 spinal stenosis decompression – 1 level. The diagnosis was listed as spondylolisthesis L5-S1 with instability at the lumbosacral junction. [11] On 19 May 2008, PPCS approved the surgery request. [12] On 18 June 2008, Mr Madoc underwent posterior/posterolateral lumbar fusion with instrumentation and/or PLIF1 level and L5/S1 spinal stenosis decompression – 1 level surgery, performed by Dr Hodgson. [13] On 1 July 2019,...

5. BV v JU [2023] NZDT 668 (27 October 2023) [pdf, 181 KB]

   ...Section 42 of the Disputes Tribunal Act provides that where the case of any party is not presented to the Tribunal after a reasonable opportunity has been given to that party to do so, the matter may be resolved by the Tribunal on such evidence or information as is before it. 2. On 22 June BV contacted JU, advertising on [online] under the trading name ‘QT’. JU visited BV on the afternoon of the 22nd to see the house and provide a quotation for house and roof painting. Later...

6. O Ltd v NH & OT [2024] NZDT 801 (11 October 2024) [pdf, 109 KB]

   ...O Ltd FIRST RESPONDENT NH SECOND RESPONDENT OT The Tribunal orders: NH and OT are jointly and severally liable to pay $308.04 to O Ltd on or before 15 November 2024. Reasons 1. NH engaged O Ltd, via the trades-platform, to attend to a faulty hot water cylinder at the premises of the OT. 2. BO of O Ltd attended the site, conducted tests, and replaced the thermostat on the cylinder, advising people present at the mosque to wait a short time to see if hot...

7. [2022] NZACC 8 – N v ACC (20 January 2022) [pdf, 303 KB]

   ...____________________________________________________________________ [1] At issue in this appeal are two decisions of the Corporation dated: [i] 28 June 2019, declining cover for a labral tear; and [ii] 15 August 2019, suspending entitlements on Ms N’s February 2019 claim. [2] Ms N also raises the issue of a possible deemed review in relation to a third review application dated 29 August 2019 that, in her submission, was not sent to review within the legislative timeframe....

8. [2021] NZEmpC 104 Oliver v Biggs [pdf, 216 KB]

   ...quantum, I start with the 2B assessment undertaken by Mr Zindel. [32] The claim made for commencing the proceeding, two days, is excessive; it should be reduced to one. [33] Turning to the telephone directions conferences, 0.8 of a day is claimed for the preparation of memoranda for either the telephone directions conferences that did proceed or requests for adjournments which were dealt with on the papers. That claim is excessive. Nor do I agree with a claim for seven appea...

9. UQ & XQ v B Ltd & BT [2023] NZDT 743 (8 December 2023) [pdf, 188 KB]

   ...under her policy. B Ltd therefore are obliged to pay UQ and XQ the amount claimed $4,704.15, as the remaining amount required to be paid by BT in damages. Referee: M Wilson Date: 8 December 2023 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...

10. SS v SH [2022] NZDT 230 (29 November 2022) [pdf, 113 KB]

    ...the terms of the contract expressly clear. He should have spelled out to SS that $3,500.00 was only a starting figure, and that other costs could well result in a much greater total price; and, second, he should have ensured that he kept his client informed about the costs as they were incurred. For these reasons, I consider the full sum claimed of $5,000.00 is not reasonable, and I have reduced it by $2,000.00. [18] I consider it fair that SS should pay SH an additional $3,000.00. That...