Search Results

1. FG Ltd v SB & ID Ltd [2023] NZDT 173 (7 June 2023) [pdf, 120 KB]

   ...previous days driving on that road he had not hit it. He rang and reported the incident. 10. ST said both respondents had a duty to maintain the roads or to warn motorists of potholes like this. 11. ST said he asked SB for months to give him information about its inspection of this stretch of road and it ignored him. Inspection reports were produced at the second hearing and indicate that stretch of road was the subject of an inspection 4 days earlier by ID Ltd. The report does not...

2. TN v K Ltd [2023] NZDT 649 (1 December 2023) [pdf, 180 KB]

   ...that it is not proven that K Ltd failed to exercise reasonable care and skill when it carried out the re-build, and TN’s claim must be dismissed. Referee: Nicholas Blake Date: 1 December 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 reh...

3. QA v FI & II [2024] NZDT 231 (6 March 2024) [pdf, 127 KB]

   ...need to consider the question regarding whether $30,000.00 is a reasonable amount of compensation. 14. For the above reasons, the claim is dismissed. Referee: L Thompson Date: 6 March 2024 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...

4. TT v JN [2024] NZDT 344 (15 May 2024) [pdf, 95 KB]

   ...have failed to prove that it is more likely than not that JN was driving without reasonable care and skill. 10. The claim by TT and J Ltd is therefore dismissed. Referee: K L Hoult Date: 15 May 2024 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 r...

5. TI v UB [2025] NZDT 47 (31 March 2025) [pdf, 171 KB]

   ...Tribunal unless exceptional circumstances apply which do not apply on the facts of this case. No award is therefore made to reimburse TI for that cost. K Cowie Disputes Tribunal Referee 31 March 2025 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...

6. ID v G Ltd & Ors [2025] NZDT 160 (9 May 2025) [pdf, 180 KB]

   ...on or before 30 May 2025. 2. R Ltd is to pay U Ltd $15,000.00 on or before 30 May 2025. Reasons 1. ID engaged G Ltd to paint the roof, fascia and garage door of her home. She also engaged F Ltd to supply and install a scaffold working platform and edge protection, for the painters. On 7 December 2022 a working platform and edge protection was installed by F Ltd. Between 8 and 12 December 2022 the painting work was completed by G Ltd. On 16 December 2022, the scaffold working pla...

7. OIA-Use of rough sex defense in court [pdf, 1.2 MB]

   Justice Centre | 19 Aitken Street DX SX10088 | Wellington T 04 918 8800 | F 04 918 8820 ContactUs@justice.govt.nz | www.justice.govt.nz 14 November 2024 Ref: OIA 116677 Tēnā koe Official Information Act request: Use of the ‘rough sex defence’ in court Thank you for your email of 14 October 2024 to the Ministry of Justice (the Ministry), requesting, under the Official Information Act 1982 (the Act), information regarding the use of the so-called “rough sex d...

8. Waitangi Tribunal - Part 5 Te Urewera [pdf, 2.1 MB]

   ...the Crown over ownership of lakes ? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 20 .4 .2 What was the Crown’s response to the Maori claims for legal ownership of the lake ? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20 20 .4 .3 What w...

9. [2010] NZEmpC 79 Silver Fern Farms Ltd v North [pdf, 50 KB]

   ...position as here. Mr Mitchell’s argument would advance the case for employees a step further. Wyatt says that not only must there be an awareness of the act or omission but the 90 day period does not begin to run until the employee considers (forms a “reasonable belief”) that the employer’s action was unjustifiable. Mr Mitchell’s argument goes one step further, however, and would have three necessary constituents: the awareness or appreciation of the act or omission, th...

10. Holt & Ors as Trustees of the Kahala Trust v Auckland Council [2011] NZWHT Auckland 15 [pdf, 129 KB]

    ...saddle flashings. Therefore they considered the membrane installer was required to ensure weathertightness by using upstands at various junctions. The junctions between the waterproofing membrane and the block work were in their opinion poorly formed and this resulted in water Page | 6 infiltrating deck areas at the junction of the membrane and column upstand. [13] Both Mr Nevill and Mr Maiden also agreed that the membrane installer had not complied with the require...