Search Results

1. MS & NS v JT [2024] NZDT 238 (26 March 2024) [pdf, 187 KB]

   ...element of “consideration” cannot be returned to them. Therefore, Mr T will have to pay them (in addition to the $6,000.00) the cash equivalent of $1,500.00. Referee: J P Smith Date: 26 March 2024 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...

2. NL & UN v ME [2022] NZDT 88 (8 June 2022) [pdf, 180 KB]

   ...upon when bidding on the house. This report stated at page 15 that the concrete side wall of the carport was “structurally sound”. The following year a crack was identified in the wall and remedial work to stabilise the carport and the wall was performed. 2. NL and UN (the Applicants) claim $30,000.00 to repair the wall. 3. The issues to be determined are: a. Did ME exercise reasonable care and skill when he produced the pre-inspection report and was the report reasonably fi...

3. DX & QX v T Ltd [2023] NZDT 215 (27 April 2023) [pdf, 99 KB]

   ...to some degree, and had then sustained some static settlement over time. He did not consider that the degree of floor differential affected the structural integrity of the house, or made worse the likely CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 2 of 4 performance of the house and its foundations in the event of a significant earthquake. The second report, written by a representative of MT, stated that “.. we are of the opinion from a structural perspective that even though the foundation settlem...

4. JB v IQ [2023] NZDT 321 (12 July 2023) [pdf, 108 KB]

   ...an earlier rule on which rule 9.12 was based, namely reg 53 of the Traffic Regulations 1956. In Berrett v Smith [1965] NZLR 460, Hutchinson J held that reg 53 was designed to protect the purchaser, and that breach of reg 53 made the seller’s performance of the contract illegal, permitting the innocent purchaser to recover any amount paid in respect of the contract. On other hand, in Fenton v Scotty's Car Sales Ltd [1968] NZLR 929, Woodhouse J held that reg 53 was designed solely to...

5. SX v GO [2023] NZDT 686 (20 December 2023) [pdf, 107 KB]

   ...that an equivalent replacement vehicle could have been obtained in the market for less than the $15,000.00 [Valuation Services] valued SX’s car at, I do not accept the $8500.00 figure put forward by GO. That is because one [online] ad, missing key information such as mileage and description, is not sufficient to prove that SX’s vehicle was uneconomic to repair at the cost of $9343.84. CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 3 of 4 14. If the repair cost had been much closer to the for...

6. UH v D Ltd [2024] NZDT 45 (2 February 2024) [pdf, 179 KB]

   ...why UH found that disappointing. Conclusion: 15. For all these reasons D Ltd is to pay UH $1,500.00 in accordance with the terms of this order. Referee: Malthus Date: 2 February 2024 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 reh...

7. HL & UL v FZ [2024] NZDT 730 (5 December 2024) [pdf, 192 KB]

   ...that repairs were reasonably competitively priced. 10. Accordingly, I find that FZ is liable for the cost of $4,684.81 as she caused the damage to the car. Referee: S Simmonds Date: 5 December 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...

8. EH & KH v G Ltd [2025] NZDT 143 (16 April 2025) [pdf, 100 KB]

   ...for within the CGA. Instead, as ordered above, the second option, if the goods are no longer available, is to receive a refund of the money paid for the couch. Referee: C Hickey Date: 16 April 2025 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 reh...

9. KM v MC & SC [2025] NZDT 53 (26 March 2025) [pdf, 179 KB]

   ...Tribunal is not able to make an award of the filing fee except in very limited circumstances that do not apply here (S.43 Disputes Tribunal Act). J F Tunnicliffe Disputes Tribunal Referee 26 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 rehe...

10. Dawson v Auckland Council [2011] NZWHT Wellington 36 [pdf, 242 KB]

    Page | 1 IN THE WEATHERTIGHT HOMES TRIBUNAL TRI-2010-100-000043 [2011] NZWHT AUCKLAND 36 BETWEEN ANTHONY AND ANGELA DAWSON Claimants AND AUCKLAND COUNCIL (formerly known as NORTH SHORE CITY COUNCIL) First Respondent AND OSBORNE PRICE CONSTRUCTION LIMITED Second Respondent AND MARK AND JOANN-LEE FULLER Third Respondents AND GREG PAUL THOMAS (Removed) Fourth Respondent AND IAN BLACK Fifth Respondent AND BARNEY CORNAGA Sixth Respond