Search Results

1. PG Ltd v KH Ltd & JC Ltd [2014] NZDT 1346 (31 October 2014) [pdf, 217 KB]

   ...I am satisfied the length and nature of KH’s inaction after discovering the mistake raises a valid estoppel. I dismiss KH’s counterclaim. Referee: J Costigan Date: 31 October 2014 CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 5 of 5 Information for Parties Rehearings On application of a party to the proceedings, the Disputes Tribunal may order a rehearing of the proceedings, on such terms as it thinks fit. If you wish to apply for a rehearing, you can obtain an applicati...

2. Buck [2010] NZWHT Auckland 34 [pdf, 89 KB]

   1 [2010] NZWHT AUCKLAND 34 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. 6324: VICKI SUSAN BUCK AND LINDSAY WILLIAM LLOYD – 14 JANE DEANS CLOSE, RICCARTON, CHRISTCHURCH ELIGIBILITY DECISION OF THE CHAIR OF THE WEATHERTIGHT HOMES TRIBUNAL The Claim [1] Vicki Buck and Lindsay Lloyd are the owners of a house at 14 Jane D...

3. Tully v Yerman [2012] NZIACDT 19 (9 May 2012) [pdf, 102 KB]

   ...Ms Yerman replied by email to Ms Tully, and indicated she needed the appeal form to be signed and some other matters, and would proceed with preparing the appeal that weekend. [10.10] 15 April 2010 A person in Ms Yerman’s office sent an email requesting some documentation from Ms Tully so the appeal could be prepared. [10.11] 20 April 2010 Ms Tully delivered the material requested in the 15 April 2010 email, including signing the appeal form, and paid the fee to lodge the appeal

4. Wentzel v Collie [2012] NZWHT Auckland 15 [pdf, 250 KB]

   ...had detailed in his assessor’s report. Mr Dibley appeared as a witness for the claimants. He had been the inspector for DBH when the two determinations were made and had prepared two substantive reports and a cladding report for DBH which formed the basis of the determinations. Mr Dibley gave evidence contemporaneously with Mr Templeman. [34] In his report Mr Templeman identified four key deficiencies causing current damage. These were: Cracking in the cladding w...

5. Body Corporate 201036 and Unit Owners of Parnell Terraces [2010] NZWHT Auckland 30 [pdf, 119 KB]

   ...adjudication. A claimant has the particular definition of being the person who applies for an assessor’s report with the Department of Building and Housing. The combination of ―claimant‖ and ―claim‖ as used in s 16 together with the information on how a claim is brought in s 9 in my opinion does not allow the wider meaning of claim as suggested by Mr Rainey. The narrower interpretation of the date on which the claim was brought as being the date the owner or representat...

6. [2021] NZEmpC 199 Lawton v Steel Pencil Holdings Ltd [pdf, 415 KB]

   ...strengthening enforcement of employment standards is also reflected in the first reading of the Bill as to the intended purpose of what became Part 9A.10 The Regulatory Impact Statement prepared by MBIE11 and the Cabinet paper12 that recommended the reforms also referred to the intention being to increase directors’ and others’ liability in circumstances where a company is unable to rectify a breach. [33] That the regime created by the 2016 Amendment was more wide-ranging than

7. TN v JH and GG [2020] 1321 NZDT (14 September 2020) [pdf, 212 KB]

   ...a perfect family car, or first car, as a perfect family car would be economic to warrant. This is therefore misleading. Also, all the other statements are only half true. Where statements are made that of themselves are true, but there is key information missing that the sellers know that relates to the information given, there is a duty to disclose the missing piece. The missing piece was that the sellers had owned the car for not much more than a week, the ad they bought it from expl...

8. WH v SS Ltd [2019] NZDT 1459 (26 March 2019) [pdf, 218 KB]

   ...to relieve the innkeeper from all responsibility. 14. I have not been satisfied that this defence applies. WH’s room was able to be accessed by hotel housekeeping staff during her stay. I was told that a cleaning service would have been performed on two occasions during WH’s stay and then a final clean and service after WH departed the hotel. 15. WH did not inform hotel staff not to enter the room. She did not assume exclusive use of the room so as to show an intention to r...

9. NI v CT [2020] NZDT 1382 (14 May 2020) [pdf, 206 KB]

   ...reasonable farmer? b. If not, is the loss by NI a foreseeable loss? CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 2 of 4 Has FM Limited acted with a standard of care expected of a reasonable farmer? 4. The relevant law is section 5 of the Animals Law Reform Act 1989 and the law of negligence. When determining negligence, the Tribunal must consider the standard of care expected of a reasonable farmer in the company’s position, the common practice in the locality in relation to fencing...

10. KG v SQ & vehicle testing company [2022] NZDT 125 (4 August 2022) [pdf, 194 KB]

    ...are jointly and severally liable to compensate [Applicant’s insurer] for the full cost of repairs. Referee: J P Smith Date: 4 August 2022 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 r...