Search Results

1. BG Ltd v EE & DE [2020] NZDT 1557 (26 August 2020) [pdf, 218 KB]

   ...initial disclosure for each loan correctly, it failed to comply with some of the requirements for subsequent disclosures. 12. Every six months from the start of each loan, BG issued a Continuing Disclosure Statement. While most of the required information was included in these statements, BG did not disclose CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 3 of 5 the annual interest rate or rates during the statement period, expressed as a percentage or percentages (CCCFA s 19(1)(h)). 13. More signifi...

2. SX v TO [2022] NZDT 43 (21 March 2022) [pdf, 207 KB]

   ...warranties or trading protection (for example, the Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 or the Fair Trading Act 1986). 4. The law relevant to this claim is the general law of contract and the Contract and Commercial Law 2017. A contract is a binding agreement formed by an offer made by one party and a subsequent acceptance by the other party. There is a well-known principle of contract law which is “caveat emptor” or “let the buyer beware”. The general position is that the buyer must be...

3. CI v LU [2023] NZDT 786 (19 December 2023) [pdf, 176 KB]

   ...into it by a misrepresentation, whether innocent or fraudulent, made to that party by or on behalf of another party to the contract. In law, a misrepresentation is a false statement of past or present fact. 7. The contract between the parties was formed when the auction closed with the buyer as the highest bidder. The buyer suggested that the point of sale was 23 May on the basis that the auction contract lapsed due to being conditional on the warrant being passed. However, the conditi...

4. Te Manutukutuku issue 72 [pdf, 2.9 MB]

   ...Waitangi Tribunal Unit News 5 Ngātiwai Mandate Inquiry Report 6 Whakatōhea Mandate Inquiry Report 7 Motiti Urgent Inquiry 8 Remedies Inquiries 9 District Inquiries 10 Kaupapa Inquiries 11 Freshwater and Geothermal Resources 12 Unregistered Treaty Claims 12 The Waitangi Tribunal Level 7, Fujitsu Tower 141 The Terrace Wellington New Zealand DX SX11237 Tel : 64 4 914 3000 Fax : 64 4 914 3001 www.waitangitribunal.govt.nz Te Manutukutuku is produced and published by the Waitangi Tribu...

5. Te Manutukutuku Issue 72 [pdf, 3.3 MB]

   ...Waitangi Tribunal Unit News 5 Ngātiwai Mandate Inquiry Report 6 Whakatōhea Mandate Inquiry Report 7 Motiti Urgent Inquiry 8 Remedies Inquiries 9 District Inquiries 10 Kaupapa Inquiries 11 Freshwater and Geothermal Resources 12 Unregistered Treaty Claims 12 The Waitangi Tribunal Level 7, Fujitsu Tower 141 The Terrace Wellington New Zealand DX SX11237 Tel : 64 4 914 3000 Fax : 64 4 914 3001 www.waitangitribunal.govt.nz Te Manutukutuku is produced and published by the Waitangi Tribu...

6. [2021] NZACC 146 – Buis v ACC (28 September 2021) [pdf, 248 KB]

   ...with Mr Buis that the “all information necessary” date should be the date of the Accident Compensation Appeal Authority’s review decision in Lewis7 which moved the date to 13 July 1992. [9] On 28 April 2017 Mr Buis wrote to the respondent requesting that it reconsider his entitlement to interest on the arrears ERC that had been paid to him in December 2006. His position was that interest on the payment should be calculated under the original s 72 (“the original s 72”) of...

7. [2007] NZEmpC AC 36/07 Bank of New Zealand v Trotter & Anor [pdf, 36 KB]

   ...Exhibit BV-M, which is a copy of a letter from Bergseng & Co Lawyers, dated 6 March 2007. That letter was written to the solicitors for the bank following a letter being sent to the liquidator for Alliance Strategic Property Investment Ltd requesting the documents, which are now sought in the filed application. In response Mr John Bergseng wrote advising that the liquidator was in receipt of the correspondence. There was no indication that the documents would be provided, but...

8. [2015] NZEmpC 143 JAE Sales Ltd t/a Aussie Butcher Birkenhead v Prins [pdf, 94 KB]

   ...against the sum awarded in annual holiday pay. The other awards are not in dispute but have not been paid by JAE to Mr Prins. The pleaded basis for the challenge was that the only proof Mr Prins offered at the Authority’s investigation was in the form of scraps of paper with handwritten dates on them. This is somewhat ironic having regard to the nature of JAE’s time and wages records produced at the hearing of the challenge and the fact that they did not even trouble themselv...

9. Kingsnorth v Crawford – Motuaruhe 5D Block (2018) 185 Waiariki MB 106 (185 WAR 106) [pdf, 377 KB]

   ...necessary where an application to issue interrogatories is opposed: r 8.5 High Court Rules. A material consideration is whether briefs of evidence will be given by the party to be interrogated. Moreover, an interrogatory is not to be confused with a request for further particulars. Discussion [19] The applicant objects to answering interrogatories 1(b), (e) and (f) on the basis that they do not relate to a matter in question between the parties. In response, Ms Wara submitted tha...

10. S Ltd v NG [2023] NZDT 669 (23 November 2023) [pdf, 166 KB]

    ...now seeks a refund of the $1,837.35 paid to her. 2. S Ltd’s claim was originally filed against NG, but N Ltd was joined as second respondent at the previous hearing since its name was used on the invoices. However, N Ltd’s representative ND informed the Tribunal and confirmed in the hearing that NG has no connection with that company and is unknown to ND. NG was the director of a company named NGD Ltd that was removed from the Companies Register in 2021. The correct respondent is the...