Search Results

1. UC v DT [2024] NZDT 791 (20 September 2024) [pdf, 138 KB]

   ...termed “soft rot” at the top of the palings. 22. I therefore find that UC is not liable for a greater proportion of the costs to replace the fence. Referee: R Merrett Date: 20 September 2024 Page 5 of 5 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. MT & SC v TD [2024] NZDT 888 (19 December 2024) [pdf, 111 KB]

   ...wiring system is not in reasonable working order. If so, what remedy is appropriate? 14. The remedy for a breach of contract is for the breaching party to put the other party back in the position they would have been had the contract been performed. Consequential losses must be caused by the breach, be reasonable, and be reasonably foreseeable as liable to result. 15. I find that MT and SC are entitled to the figure of $3,302.00 for new carpet, and $600.00 they paid a friend to...

3. C Ltd v HK [2025] NZDT 144 (24 March 2025) [pdf, 203 KB]

   ...is for legal costs she has incurred getting advice on how to defend the Applicant’s claim and for the loss of income for the time she took off work to attend the first hearing. CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 2 of 5 7. At the hearing I informed HK that generally costs are not awarded against a party to proceedings in this Tribunal. HK’s circumstances do not fit any of the exceptions to that rule. Issues 8. The issues are: i) Whether CT made a material misrepresentatio...

4. Friesen v Accident Compensation Corporation (Issue estoppel) [2025] NZACC 134 (25 August 2025) [pdf, 343 KB]

   ...and fundamental steps in the logic of the South African Judge's judgment. While the findings did not determine the existence or non-existence of the cause of action, they were essential and fundamental steps in the judgment. 4 [20] Both forms of estoppel have been applied in the accident compensation jurisdiction. In Wood, 5 Judge Cadenhead set out the requirements for cause of action estoppel/res judicata and issue estoppel as follows: [18] The starting point for any consid...

5. LE v BI [2024] NZDT 31 (2 February 2024) [pdf, 139 KB]

   ...being the address LE obtained for him from the 2023 electoral roll. I therefore went ahead with the hearing without BI because a Respondent is not obliged to attend the hearing of a claim made against them. This decision is based on the evidence and information before me in accordance with s42 of the Disputes Tribunal Act 1988. Issues 4. The issues I need to determine are: (a) Did BI make a representation to LE about the Baby Carrier and, if so, was LE induced by the representatio...

6. B Ltd v Council [2024] NZDT 709 (2 July 2024) [pdf, 151 KB]

   ...construction of a new boundary line fence. Referee: T Prowse Date: 2 July 2024 5 This because there is no obligation in the Fencing Act that imposes liability on council for a boundary line fence. Page 5 of 5 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. BN & EN v Z Ltd [2025] NZDT 76 (4 March 2025) [pdf, 206 KB]

   ...report who was not a Licensed Building Practitioner. As BN & EN have not proven their claim, it is dismissed. Referee: K Cowie DTR Date: 4 March 2025 1 (2000) 11 ANZ Insurance Cases 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...

8. DT v BQ Ltd [2022] NZDT 22 (15 February 2022) [pdf, 183 KB]

   ...to all or any of the $400.00 claimed? 16. Where there has been a misrepresentation established, a party is entitled to seek damages. The object is to place the aggrieved party in the position that they would have occupied had the contract been performed as originally agreed. 17. DT seeks compensation, not a full refund. She paid $1,350.00 and $110.00 cleaning fee when she booked the property. She acknowledges she stayed on for the period she was booked in to stay. However, part of the...

9. X v Y Ltd [2021] NZDT 1425 (18 March 2021) [pdf, 224 KB]

   ...c) Are Mr and Mrs X entitled to payment of the legal costs claimed? Has Y breached the Management Agreement by reducing the weekly management fee payments to Mr and Mrs X between 3 April & 28 August 2020? 4. Parties to a contract must perform their respective obligations. If they do not, they will be in breach and need to account for any loss to the other party to the contract. 5. Mr and Mrs X had a Management Agreement with Y dated 7 November 2016 (the Agreement) unde...

10. BH v MW Ltd [2023] NZDT 35 (28 March 2023) [pdf, 198 KB]

    ...Should BH be granted relief or compensation and if so, how much? 6. A party to a contract may cancel the contract if, by words or actions, the other party to the contract repudiates the contract by making it clear that that party does not intend to perform its obligations under the contract (S.36 Contract and Commercial Law Act) or if the other party to the contract breaches a term of the contract (S. 37 CCLA). 7. The cancelling party may apply for relief (S.43 and 45 CCLA) and or dama...