Search Results

1. LI v WH Ltd [2021] NZDT 1697 (13 November 2021) [pdf, 153 KB]

   ...the loss of the vehicle? b) If so, what compensation is LI entitled to? Is WH Ltd liable for the loss of the vehicle? 5. The relevant law is Part 5, subpart 1 of the Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 (“CCL”), which incorporates the former Carriage of Goods Act 1979. The carriage of goods provisions in the CCL apply to any loss or damage to items while they are with the carrier. The CCL provides that loss includes the non-delivery of goods (s246). 6. The carriage of good...

2. QX & TN v P Ltd [2025] NZDT 108 (17 March 2025) [pdf, 198 KB]

   ...“life of the plan”. QX and TN moved from pre-pay onto the plan and have each been paying $25.00 per month (being the $45.00 monthly fee with a discount of $20.00 per month) until August 2024, nearly three years. 3. In August 2024 QX and TN were informed that the plan they were on was being discontinued, and they were automatically transferred to a new plan. The new plan was also $45.00 but did not include a $20.00 per month discount. 4. QX and TN now claim $6,280.00 from P Ltd o...

3. UA v BT [2025] NZDT 132 (1 March 2025) [pdf, 204 KB]

   ...the balance of probabilities (that is, that it is more likely than not). When assessing whether the onus of proof has been discharged by an applicant, I need CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 2 of 4 to consider and evaluate the evidence and information presented by the parties. While I have carefully considered all the evidence and submissions from the parties, I have only addressed the evidence and arguments to the extent necessary to explain my decision. Whether the laptop wa...

4. Te Manutukutuku (Issue 82) [pdf, 14 MB]

   ...mauri ora! E tiro whakarunga te kanohi tāngata ki a Matariki kanohi iti, te mātahi o te tau. 2 The last few months have seen the Tribunal busy with urgent inquir- ies and reports, as we note in this edi- tion of Te Manutukutuku. Since the formation of the new Government, applications for urgency have been received and granted concerning : the disestablishment of Te Aka Whai Ora (the Māori Health Authority) ; the treatment of te reo Māori in the pub- lic service ; the repea...

5. X Ltd v U Ltd [2023] NZDT 335 (1 March 2023) [pdf, 242 KB]

   ...oral. 5. In contract disputes, there is a legal rule called the Parol Evidence Rule. The Parol Evidence Rule says that extrinsic evidence, including discussions and negotiations that occurred prior to entering into a written contract should not form part of a contract which is in written form. This is on the basis that the terms of a written, and signed, contract should be able to be relied on by parties as setting out their rights and obligations under a contract. However, in limited...

6. Anderson v Anderson – Estate of Barlow Nathaniel Hahona Anderson (2018) 185 Waiariki MB 287 (185 WAR 287) [pdf, 332 KB]

   ...behalf of the whānau, by refusing to provide any account of his administration for the past six years. More particularly: (a) As executor, Adam has neglected or otherwise failed to account for the assets and income of Barlow’s estate despite requests from Charles Anderson as a beneficiary; and (b) As trustee for the Barlow Anderson Family Trust, Adam has neglected or otherwise failed to account for the assets and income of the trust, including rentals and proceeds of sale for...

7. [2014] NZEmpC 76 Matsuoka v LSG Sky Chefs NZ Ltd [pdf, 52 KB]

   ...Bruce Stewart QC has appeared with Mr Nicholson this morning for the plaintiff, Mr Stewart being recently brought into the matter. He, having considered the proceedings, has indicated that the plaintiff wishes to file a third amended statement of claim. [2] This third amended statement of claim, which has been handed up in a draft or proposed draft form this morning, effectively discontinues the proceedings against the second defendant, Jacob Roest and the third defendant...

8. [2024] NZEmpC 149 Osborne v Callaghan Innovation [pdf, 173 KB]

   ...Callaghan Innovation has applied for them to be fixed. It seeks costs of $24,330.20 on a Category 2 Band B basis in accordance with the Court’s Practice Directions Guideline Scale.3 [5] Mr Osborne opposed Callaghan Innovation’s application and requested that any amount awarded against him be reduced from what was claimed. He did not indicate how much the claim should be reduced by or otherwise state what could be considered a just sum to award. [6] In addition to submiss...

9. GC v NT [2022] NZDT 184 (30 September 2022) [pdf, 94 KB]

   ...the deposit NT retained. 8. The issues to be determined are: (a) Was it a term of the contract that the deposit was non-refundable? (b) Was it reasonable for GC to expect to have an input into the playlist after the contract had been formed? If so, did NT refuse to consider her requests? CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 2 of 3 (c) Is NT entitled to keep the deposit? Was it a term of the contract that the deposit was non-refundable? 9. A contract is a legal agreemen...

10. TXY v Police [2025] NZHRRT 31 [pdf, 358 KB]

    ...INZ and says that she would hate to press charges if they are going to have him deported anyway. Morning LZA I have been in touch with Immigration and they replied with a copy of the letter they sent to him. Interpol have also forwarded a request to [redacted]. He has until 21 July to respond with further reasons why he should be considered for residence. I will discuss things with you when I see you but I agree we should not rush into charges if there are still alternative res...