Search Results

1. OP & EI v GJ Ltd [2019] NZDT 1305 (14 October 2019) [pdf, 186 KB]

   ...with the issues that arose, would not have wanted to buy them for this house (s21; s36). 11. The unusual features of the windows render them unsuitable for the applicants’ property and as a result, the consequences of not being adequately informed are considerable. Are the applicants entitled to a refund? CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 3 of 4 12. Where goods are supplied that are not fit for purpose, and that failure is substantial, a consumer is entitled to reject the goods...

2. BT v KG [2020] NZDT 1457 (16 March 2020) [pdf, 223 KB]

   ...email from Partridges to BT noted that it was surprised to be told by Rolex that this was not a genuine product. I find it more likely than not that if BT had asked Partridges to examine the watch prior to purchase he would have been given the same information that KG had been given as to its genuineness and value. The date on the valuation KG had was 7 November 2019, which was 5 days before BT agreed to buy the watch. 23. The Tribunal has to consider what relief should be granted.

3. TH & UH v DM & MT [2022] NZDT 262 (5 December 2022) [pdf, 218 KB]

   ...refund to the Buyer the difference between the price received from the new owner (if any) after deduction of any expenses incurred whilst the Dog is in the care of the Breeder.” 2. If the Dog HAS BEEN desexed, then the Buyer will immediately inform the Breeder and provide the contact details of the new owner, and the buyer will ensure that the new owner will abide by the terms and conditions of the contract to the extent that they remain relevant at the time of the rehoming. Did t...

4. ES Ltd v OH & TH [2024] NZDT 214 (28 March 2024) [pdf, 134 KB]

   ...identified but, he said, ES Ltd had not been given the opportunity to do so. He provided copies of emails from OH that emphatically stated that he and TH did not want ES Ltd to return to their property. [6] EQ said that he considered the work had been performed according to the scope of works, and that he would have attended to any defects if he had been allowed to do so. He noted that the house was some 70 years old, and that precision was not always possible in placing and securing fit...

5. NM v LK [2023] NZDT 216 (13 April 2023) [pdf, 181 KB]

   ...identical except that the report provided by LK had been edited, so that the references made by the vet to lameness had been removed. It was not apparent on the face of the edited report that any changes had been made. [6] NM said that she had informed LK of the nature of her [business] and had made clear her requirement that the horse be healthy. Because the vet report provided to her by LK had been completed only a short time before, NM did not obtain another one. She said she had reli...

6. KU v T Ltd [2024] NZDT 876 (15 September 2024) [pdf, 198 KB]

   ...reasons set out in Clause 9 above, I find it has not been proved that BL’s representation prior to purchase that the [car] had suffered no water damage was false. Did BL advise KU to go ahead and have the vehicle repaired? 12. KU says he kept BL informed about what he was doing, and that BL indicated that T Ltd would pay for the repair. 13. However, BL’s evidence is that he advised KU that the General Manager made decisions about post-sale repairs. BL said that he did not tell...

7. Q Ltd v EZ [2024] NZDT 860 (30 October 2024) [pdf, 123 KB]

   ...system and therefore he incurred unnecessary additional costs. The issues to be determined are: (i) Was there proper communication regarding the cost for the first call out? (ii) Was the price charged by Q Ltd reasonable? (iii) Did Q Ltd perform its services with reasonable care and skill when it identified the fault to be with the pump and control panel? Was there proper communication regarding the cost for the first call out? CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 2 of 4 6. I...

8. BD & NT v S Ltd & C Ltd [2024] NZDT 769 (4 October 2024) [pdf, 105 KB]

   ...to replace the driveway ranging from $10,202.52 to $14,708.50 including GST. However, the clients raised a number of issues with these, including that they only covered the driveway and not the path or slab or utilities, were based on incomplete information, and appeared to be provided at “mates’ rates” by friends of the subcontractor. Also, the respondents’ quotations were based on machine removal, but this would not be possible for the path and would involve a risk of damage to t...

9. IN & TN v D Ltd [2024] NZDT 446 (23 April 2024) [pdf, 197 KB]

   ...comparing IN and TN’s finished property with one that didn’t have the compromising changes to the yard and wardrobe space, given the permanent loss of amenity. Referee Perfect Date: 23 April 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 re...

10. GO & NO v P Ltd [2025] NZDT 163 (13 May 2025) [pdf, 199 KB]

    ...is) not unusual. Accounts do not have to be set up ‘in store’. In the modern world consumers expect the convenience of setting up an account online or over the phone. 16. KD explained that if an account applicant provides driver’s license information as identification, the way that P Ltd verified the identification was that it was checked against the NZTA database. 17. This process would identify if a person used false (made-up) information, but it cannot identify if a person...