Search Results

1. EL v CF Ltd [2022] NZDT 81 (30 March 2022) [pdf, 112 KB]

   ...from CF Ltd’s premises, and CF Ltd would normally give instruction to customers about how to operate the vehicles they bought. In this case, said BC, EL had asked for the car to be delivered to him in [City 1]. He had, therefore, not received the information that would normally be given to a customer. [10] LM said that EL had said in a telephone conversation that he, EL, had attempted to jump start the car. To do so, said LM, would not have been safe in a modern [type redacted] car,...

2. LD Ltd v SQ Ltd [2023] NZDT 57 (21 February 2023) [pdf, 100 KB]

   ...contractual breach substantially reduces the benefit of the contract to the innocent party. I therefore find that SQ Ltd was entitled to cancel the contract. 10. The effect of cancellation under the CCLA is that neither party is obliged to continue performance of the contract, so SQ Ltd does not have to pay LD Ltd’s final invoice for $3,945.81 issued on 19 July 2021. Cancellation does not result in an automatic refund or discharge debts that have already accrued, so it does not affect...

3. TC v X Ltd & I Ltd [2024] NZDT 706 (4 September 2024) [pdf, 135 KB]

   ...unnecessarily. 7. I Ltd’s plumbing claims its invoiced amount of $1334.00 from TC. 8. The issues to be determined are: • Were the blockages caused by construction waste? • If so, what remedy is available to TC? • Did I Ltd perform their service with reasonable care and skill when they opened up the ceiling to check for issues further down the system? • If not, what remedy is available to TC? Were the blockages caused by construction waste? 9. I find that...

4. TN v SH [2024] NZDT 569 (5 July 2024) [pdf, 205 KB]

   ...other than a reasonable driver would do. Conclusion 21. For all these reasons TH is obliged to pay TN $13,500.00 in accordance with the terms of this order. Referee: Malthus Date: 5 July 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 reh...

5. SK v UW [2024] NZDT 607 (13 September 2024) [pdf, 205 KB]

   ...$20.00? Did NQB’s terms and conditions include a term that riding lessons were non-refundable? If so, is that term binding on SK? Page 2 of 4 5. The law of contract applies. A legally enforceable contract can be written or oral; formal or informal. A legally enforceable contract exists where an offer has been made on sufficiently certain terms by one party to another party; the other party has accepted those terms; there is consideration (an exchange of values); an...

6. [2016] NZEmpC 86 Radius Residential Care Ltd v The NZ Nurses Organisation Inc [pdf, 182 KB]

   ...AND IN THE MATTER of an application for an order for disclosure of documents BETWEEN RADIUS RESIDENTIAL CARE LIMITED Plaintiff AND THE NEW ZEALAND NURSES ORGANISATION INC First Defendant AND E TU INC (FORMERLY THE SERVICE & FOOD WORKERS UNION NGA RINGA TOTA INC) Second Defendant AND THE EMPLOYEES LISTED IN SCHEDULE A OF THE STATEMENT OF CLAIM Third Defendants Hearing: 27 June 2016 (Heard at Auckland) App

7. Legal Aid Audit Report 2017-2018 [pdf, 367 KB]

   ...subsequent years. Where appropriate, action may be taken under the Ministry’s complaints policy. Lawyers may be issued with a reminder of expectations, a first, second or final notice, or referred to the Performance Review Committee (PRC). Lawyers can request a review of any remedial action that is taken. More details of the audit process can be found in the audit and monitoring policy and the audit terms of reference. https://www.justice.govt.nz/assets/Documents/Publications/A...

8. [2021] NZEmpC 53 Martin v Solar Bright Ltd (in liq) [pdf, 149 KB]

   ...name, the name of his counsel, contact details and a signature. [6] Page two invited the applicant to write down the documents he or she wished to inspect. The information provided consisted of the name of the case, its file number, and a request to inspect: Such documents on [the] court file as the Court deems appropriate to allow me access to on a confidential basis. 2 “Employment Court of New Zealand Practice Directions” <www.employmentcourt.govt.nz> at No 16...

9. Shepherd & Ors as Trustees of the Bell Shepherd Family Trust v Lay [pdf, 288 KB]

   ...hearing I was told that neither Mr Townsend nor Counsel had been aware of the company’s removal, and steps were being taken to have the company reinstated on the Register. Therefore, I am proceeding on the assumption that JTL is still a legally formed and registered company 3.8 The ninth respondent is Mr Peter Townsend, who is a director of JTL. The Owners claim that Mr Townsend has a personal liability for the claims that they Claim 00062 – Ponsonby Gardens Unit 7...

10. Lee v Auckland Council [2016] NZWHT Auckland 2 [pdf, 317 KB]

    ...consisted of the original plans with the notation, “wall cladding changed to Insulclad”. This was incorrect as the cladding being used was not Insulclad but another EIFS product, Styroplast. [10] On 31 October 2002 a cladding inspection was requested. The inspection was not carried out and there is some uncertainty as to what occurred that day. [11] On 18 November 2002 the Council carried out a pre-line plumbing and drainage recheck and a post-line inspection of the firs...