Search Results

1. NC v NO [2023] NZDT 544 (20 September 2023) [pdf, 122 KB]

   ...September 2023 at 9.15am. The respondent NO had been notified of the hearing but failed to attend, although his phone number seemed to be connected. On 16 June 2023, NO had emailed the tribunal. He acknowledged the existence of this proceeding and informed the tribunal that he was living overseas. As his phone number may have been different, he was requested to provide his overseas phone number, to facilitate a telephone hearing, but he failed to do that. Background On 4 January 2...

2. MU v OL [2023] NZDT 698 (14 December 2023) [pdf, 203 KB]

   ...the car. 21. For these reasons I am satisfied that MU has proved his claim against OL and that OL should pay for the repairs in the sum of $4,847.25. Referee: K Johnson Date: 14 December 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...

3. BI & KI v SC & KT [2021] NZDT 1710 (18 October 2021) [pdf, 126 KB]

   ...contain any promise by KT and SC to repair the guttering. However, KI requested in an email “could (we) please have the gutters emptied and the disconnected one repaired”. BC, the solicitor for the vendors, advised that KT and SC agreed to perform that work if the agreement was confirmed as unconditional. The contract went unconditional in approximately one week of KT and SC accepting to do that work. 4. BI and KI said the guttering was not repaired to a suitable standard. They pro...

4. [2014] NZEmpc 85 McCartney v Atlas Concrete Ltd and First Union [pdf, 107 KB]

   ...rules?”. [3] The starting point is, therefore, the relevant rules of the Union at the time it declined to continue to represent Mr McCartney in the matter of his personal grievance with his former employer. [4] Mr Cranney has, at the Court’s request, supplied certified copies of the Union’s rules for the years 2007 and 2008. Those were then the rules of the National Distribution Union Inc (NDU) but the fact that the rights and obligations in law of the NDU have been assumed...

5. [2021] NZACC 28 - Williams v ACC (4 February 2021) [pdf, 171 KB]

   ...appellant’s covered injury was not established. [2] The issue on this appeal is whether this decision was correct. Background [3] The appellant sustained an injury to his right foot on 28 September 2018 when, as described in an ACR45 form submitted to the Corporation, the fork of a forklift dropped onto his right foot. [4] On 28 September 2018, the appellant who then was 26, presented at the emergency department of Dunedin Hospital with a crush injury to his right fo...

6. Berry & Ors as Trustees of the Burns Berry Trust v Lay [pdf, 301 KB]

   ...Gardens – Unit 8 page 9 of 123 01-Aug-96 CCC issued for retaining wall and drive (AC/95/0899) 01-Aug-96 CCC issued for replacing damaged piles (AC/95/8744) 01-Apr-98 Transfer of Unit 8 from E Berry to Trust 07-Feb-00 E Berry informed Taradale of cracks in plaster and possible leaks 08-Jun-01 E Berry informed Taradale of further leaks 20-Aug-01 Taradale Ponsonby Gardens Limited responded to complaints to E Berry 02-Nov-01 Taradale reports on cracks and deck...

7. Procter [2012] NZWHT Auckland 22 [pdf, 76 KB]

   1 [2012] NZWHT AUCKLAND 22 UNDER the Weathertight Homes Resolution Services Act 2006 IN THE MATTER of a reconsideration of the Chief Executive’s decision under section 49 CLAIM NO. 6853: ROGER GEORGE PROCTER, PAULINE JANICE PROCTER AND GEOFFREY LEONARD PROCTER – 31 The Crowsnest, Whitby, Porirua ELIGIBILITY DECISION OF THE CHAIR OF THE WEATHERTIGHT HOMES TRIBUNAL [1] Roger, Pauline and Geoffrey Procter are the owners of a property a...

8. Deliu v New Zealand Law Society [2012] NZHRRT 1 [pdf, 103 KB]

   ...The allegations made against Randerson J [10] In the separate “Bundle of Documents – Randerson J complaint by F Deliu” there is a letter dated 27 May 2010 from Mr Deliu to the Judicial Conduct Commissioner. It opens: I write to lodge a formal complaint against Justice Randerson. The essential grounds of my complaint are that his Honour has: 1. Defamed me to the President of the New Zealand Law Society; 2. Refused to apologize to a fellow court officer as a duty of respect wo...

9. TX & AS v WU and ors [2023] NZDT 88 (22 March 2023) [pdf, 194 KB]

   ...couple. The price was much lower than they hoped but they liked the couple and wanted to help them. 12. The law relevant to this claim is the general law of contract and the Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017. A contract is a binding commitment formed by an offer made by one party and a subsequent acceptance by the other party. The relevant contract in this case is the sale and purchase agreement dated 22 June 2022. There is a well-known principle of contract law which is “caveat...

10. USM v Q Ltd [2022] NZDT 291 (27 September 2022) [pdf, 153 KB]

    ...USM’s vehicle outside unit 3, the unit next to the gym. There are two ‘no parking’ signs on the windows, and a sign which carries the letters PO Ltd. Although the photographs do not show any details of the signs clearly, they convey enough information for me to find that USM parked in PO Ltd’s carpark. Did USM breach the terms of a contract or commit the tort of trespass? Was there a contract? 10. Q Ltd relies on the law of contract. It says the ‘no parking’ sign cons...