Search Results

1. Workington v Sheffield LCRO 55 / 2009 (26 August 2009) [pdf, 148 KB]

   ...lawyers mainly involved in the transaction were Mr X and Ms Sheffield, but Mr Sheffield, also a partner, was named by the Workingtons for the purposes of the complaints. He provided the Standards Committee with a response to the complaints, informing the Committee that both of the other lawyers had left the firm by the time of the complaints. [2] The complaints relate to legal charges (fees being higher than quoted), legal services (failure to notify Council of change of ownersh...

2. [2021] NZACC 98 – Newman v ACC (6 July 2021) [pdf, 314 KB]

   ...against a review decision of 23 August 2017 upholding the decision of Progressive Enterprise Limited (“Progressive”), an accredited employer under Accident Compensation Corporation’s (“ACC”) partnership programme, declining Ms Newman’s claim for a fracture of the right upper limb occurring at work. [2] Ms Newman claims that she suffered an injury to her right shoulder at work on 8 June 2017. [3] Progressive submit that Ms Newman suffers from a pre-existing gra...

3. II v XQ Ltd [2021] NZDT 1610 (6 July 2021) [pdf, 178 KB]

   ...difficulty of reading it. [4] II denied that he had a contract with XQ Ltd because, he said, the sign had been difficult to read. As the sign could be read only after he had entered the car park, his argument was that no contract could have been formed at the time he drove in. He also argued that, if a contract had been formed (which he did not accept), a fee of $65.00 could not reasonably be charged by XQ Ltd. This was because he considered the sum was a penalty, and did not reflect any...

4. Taylor v Orcon Ltd [2015] NZHRRT 15 [pdf, 125 KB]

   ...systems are updated … [Emphasis added] [33] A few days later, on 24 October 2013, another employee of Orcon (possibly called Melody Hieatt) made the following entry acknowledging Mr Taylor had been billed incorrectly. Her note reads: Recall was requested as investigation showed we had billed incorrectly. Once credits applied showed that the customer did not owe us anything and in fact was left in credit. [34] This is a significant entry not only for what it says, but also because...

5. NG v TF [2022] NZDT 18 (24 February 2022) [pdf, 195 KB]

   ...whether TF agree to pay for the cost to replace the glass and if she is liable to pay the amount claimed of $462.30? Did TF agree to pay for the cost to replace the glass? If so, is she liable to pay $462.30? 4. A legally binding contract is formed where both parties intend to contract on agreed terms. For a contract to be enforceable the terms of the contract need to be certain and clear. A contract does not have to be in writing for it to be enforceable. 5. NG said TF agreed...

6. NM v BU Ltd [2021] NZDT 1580 (24 June 2021) [pdf, 210 KB]

   ...his claim. Having carefully considered all the issues I find that NM has not proven the tow fee should be refunded and therefore must dismiss his claim. Referee: P McKinstry Date: 24 June 2021 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 re...

7. [2015] NZEmpC 200 South Pacific Meats Ltd v NZ Meat Workers & Related Trades Union Inc [pdf, 177 KB]

   ...1, at [12]. 3 At [13]. [8] The plaintiff’s case is that the Union had advised of only four current union members employed at its Awarua and Melvern plants, two at each plant. In respect of the Awarua plant, the plaintiff says that requests for access by the Union since the beginning of October 2014 numbered 15 while the day shift was operating, and eight during periods when the night shift was at work. Of those 23 intended visits, the plaintiff says that it refused ac...

8. [2010] NZEmpc 98 Marshment v Sheppard Industries Ltd [pdf, 81 KB]

   ...of its investigation meeting, it nevertheless had ample opportunity to seek to do so on this challenge by hearing de novo, but did not. [11] The e-mails or other written communications are not complete records because material that formed part of them is considered by the defendant to be so secret that it cannot be disclosed to Mr Marshment’s counsel in this case. [12] Finally, the submissions to be made by the plaintiff were said by Mr Allan to contain numerous and re...

9. Donnelly v Tuala Rongohaere Marae (2007) 78 Ruatoria MB 55 (78 RUA 55) [pdf, 267 KB]

   ...as well as making them fail in their duties to be responsible, for the asset the marae. Any potential liabilities like this grant which they may acquire. When confronted with these issues the trustees simply failed to turn up to the meetings requested by myself, and advised others not to bother to attend. They continued on their merry way. It is clear that there is some support in the Court for the organised meeting for the trustees to continue. No doubt the Court will take tha...

10. ME & NN v QU Ltd [2021] NZDT 1494 (5 May 2021) [pdf, 200 KB]

    ...contract between NN and ME and QU, was the contract frustrated? CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 2 of 5 c) Is QU liable to refund the balance of $4,000.00 and should it be allowed to retain an amount to cover expenses incurred for the purpose of performing the contract? As regards the [package] tour, did QU contract with NN and ME on its own behalf, or as an agent for a supplier? 6. Agency is a relationship which arises when one person (the principal) authorises another person (...