Search Results

1. UW v X Ltd [2022] NZDT 290 (12 December 2022) [pdf, 185 KB]

   ...downplay UW’s ability. UW contacted DQ from OQ Ltd when he didn’t get the PG2 licence from X Ltd. DQ viewed footage of UW paragliding and stated that UW could not control forward and reverse inflations sufficiently for a PG2 licence. UW was informed of this. DQ records that UW responded that he would practice. 6. The second instructor that considered UW to be too unsafe to issue a PG2 licence to at the time was OI, [redacted]. She along with three other instructors at Q L...

2. EI & RA v IL [2023] NZDT 114 (2 March 2023) [pdf, 209 KB]

   ...from the collision. The damage is consistent with the nature of the impact and includes repair of the denting and scraping on the left front of IL’s vehicle. Referee: Kaho Date: 2 March 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 rehe...

3. CV v IT [2023] NZDT 185 (31 July 2023) [pdf, 225 KB]

   ...the amount that she should have paid to have the cabin built to an acceptable standard. e. IT is not obliged to pay CV. f. CV’s claim is dismissed. Referee: Nicholas Blake Date: 31 July 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...

4. ED v UQ [2023] NZDT 305 (19 June 2023) [pdf, 205 KB]

   ...in had the representation regarding the horse’s condition been true, she is entitled to claim $2,060.47 in damages. Accordingly, this amount is awarded. Referee: DTR Fuli Date: 19 June 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...

5. V Ltd v BS [2023] NZDT 695 (8 December 2023) [pdf, 154 KB]

   ...a personal guarantee he would reimburse V Ltd for any ‘clawback’ paid to [insurance company], which is not enforceable because it is not compliant with s27(2). 8. A personal guarantee is a binding undertaking someone gives to guarantee performance of a party to a contract of which the party giving the guarantee is not a contracting party, and which is enforceable against the guarantor by the other party to the contract. If the contract between [Insurance Company] and V Ltd was si...

6. Soulsby v Accident Compensation Corporation (Weekly Compensation) [2024] NZACC 31 [pdf, 301 KB]

   ...February 2024 Held at: Auckland District Court Appearances: J Robinson for the Appellant F Becroft for the Accident Compensation Corporation (“the Corporation”) Judgment: 19 February 2024 RESERVED JUDGMENT OF JUDGE P R SPILLER [Claim for interest on weekly compensation - s 114(1), backdated weekly compensation – s 105, cl 43, Sch 1, alleged delay, s 134(1)(b), Accident Compensation Act 2001 (“the Act”)] Introduction [1] These are appeals from the follow...

7. LM v RB LCRO 332/2012 (15 June 2016) [pdf, 54 KB]

   ...as for the Standards Committee. 15 [47] I have therefore given consideration as to whether or not this decision should be published. [48] It is the practice of this Office to seek submissions on publication from the parties if the LCRO forms a preliminary view that publication may be in the public interest. Again, and at this stage, it is a matter of discretion. [49] One of the expressed purposes of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act is “to protect the consumers of legal se...

8. [2014] NZEmpC 169 Goulden v Capital and Coast District Health Board [pdf, 97 KB]

   ...out their respective views of the matter. [3] The facts are: a) On 7 July 2014, the plaintiff’s lawyers contacted the defendant’s lawyers asking whether they were authorised to accept service of the plaintiff’s statement of claim. By email of 7 July 2014, counsel for the defendant confirmed that she was so authorised. b) On the same day a letter was sent by signature-required courier from the plaintiff to the defendant, enclosing by way of service the statemen...

9. Tomov v Auckland Council [2012] NZWHT Auckland 34 [pdf, 221 KB]

   ...the document signed by Mr Thomas dated 19 August 2003, was subsequently endorsed with a building consent number (20022485) and signed as “okay” on 22 September 2003. There is no evidence that the Council declined to accept this document or requested any other document from the developer or ABC. 18 [59] The Council carried out final building inspections on 7 November 2003 and 3 December 2003. A CCC was issued on 4 December 2003. [60] Ms Divich submits tha...

10. Adoption Action Inc v Attorney-General [2016] NZHRRT 9 [pdf, 371 KB]

    ...whether a meaning consistent or less inconsistent with the right can be found [254] REMEDY [257] Crown submissions on remedy [260] Discussion – the comity point [262] The law reform point [267] The “good practice” point [270] The Crown request for a further remedies hearing [272] DECLARATION [277] COSTS [280] 5 INTRODUCTION [1] The Adoption Act 1955 came into force on 27 October 1955, some 61 years ago. But as one informed commentator has pointed out, the o...