Search Results

1. Taylor v Orcon Ltd (Costs) [2015] NZHRRT 32 [pdf, 51 KB]

   ...amount to double recovery. [22] The only issue is whether the “average” award should be adjusted up or down in the particular circumstances of the case. In our view the amount should be adjusted upwards to take account of the fact the Tribunal requested post-hearing submissions on remedies. See the Minute dated 20 April 2015. An uplift of $500 is justified. [23] As to the disbursements, they can only be described as modest given Ms Taylor had responsibility for preparing the comm...

2. Nabi v Devi [2011] NZIACDT 21 (7 July 2011) [pdf, 74 KB]

   ...January 2010, the application was granted and a visitor’s permit was issued. [6.6.3] An application for a student visa was lodged on 25 January 2010 and on 1 April 2010 it was approved (subject to certain conditions). [6.7] The Complainant has requested information regarding the services provided but has never had an adequate explanation. The Code of Conduct requires an immigration adviser shall confirm in writing when applications are lodged and provide timely updates. The papers...

3. S Dwan v Park No 3 Trust & Ors [2013] NZWHT Auckland 10 [pdf, 209 KB]

   ...Dorpe was not immediately responsible. The builder’s negligence was a major contributor to the damage and I assess the builder’s contribution at 55 per cent. [54] Mr van den Dorpe had a substantial responsibility for plastering a badly formed substrate in a manner which would cause leaks. This amounted to a significant factor. I assess his liability to contribute to the cost of the damage at 20 per cent share of the total proved, namely $37,475.39. [55] As Susan Dwan so...

4. [2024] NZEmpC 212 Kavallaris v Inframax Construction Ltd [pdf, 295 KB]

   ...December 2023 Mr Kavallaris’ lawyer wrote to Inframax raising concerns of workplace stress, unfair disadvantage, and being subjected to unfair and unreasonable behaviour. The complaint primarily related to Ms Gribben. Mr Kavallaris requested that his concerns be investigated and that interim measures be put in place in the meantime. [8] Inframax’s board chair, Earl Rattray, was appointed as the decision maker of Mr Kavallaris’ complaint. He engaged a lawyer, Alast...

5. DH v KQ [2021] NZDT 1654 (9 November 2021) [pdf, 203 KB]

   ...TradeMe advertisement he “copied /pasted” the specifications from a website, and also stated that he was the second owner and was “selling as is, no manuals, nor any packaging”. He argued that this should have given prospective purchasers some form of awareness, so they should research further and check the serial number with the manufacturer. However, I find that these other statements did not communicate clearly that KQ was not sure that what he was selling matched the specificat...

6. NT v HO [2023] NZDT 303 (9 August 2023) [pdf, 109 KB]

   ...of any further deductions he considered were justified from NT’s bond, and has not done so. 17. On this basis I find that HO is liable to pay NT $455.71. Referee: L Trevelyan Date: 9 August 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 re...

7. DI v EL & N Ltd [2024] NZDT 81 (23 January 2024) [pdf, 134 KB]

   ...on the continuing road. CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 2 of 3 7. The collision occurred at the intersection of [Street 1] and [Street 2] in [Suburb 1] on a weekday morning at around 8-8.30am, during the normal “rush hour”. [Street 2] forms a T intersection with [Street 1]. [Street 2] is a terminating road and [Street 1] is the continuing road. 8. EL was on [Street 2] intending to turn right across [Street 1] to drive North towards [Suburb 2]. DI was driving down [Street...

8. OT v UB [2024] NZDT 817 (11 November 2024) [pdf, 218 KB]

   ...issues (photos exhibited), and it had last had a Certificate of Fitness check on 22 March 2024 which it passed and which the respondent had completed in preparation for a sale. 8. However, on the occasion of that check, VTNZ noted details on a form listing issues with the van that may be needed to be looked at on its next COF check (September 2024) and the list included reference to certain mechanical issues and “all rust”. CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 2 of 4 9. Toget...

9. BT v Q Ltd [2025] NZDT 165 (14 January 2025) [pdf, 182 KB]

   ...BT liable to pay the extra charges? What was the legal basis, if any, for the initial fee? 5. Q Ltd submitted that BT had accepted the terms on its sign and website by conduct when she entered the carpark, and that a unilateral contract had been formed. This makes no sense. A unilateral contract (a promise in exchange for an act) would only be formed if Q Ltd promised something in return for BT parking there, such as “Park here and we’ll give you a free ice cream”. A unilateral co...

10. [2010] NZEmpC 77 Poulter v Antipodean Growers Ltd [pdf, 37 KB]

    ...[5] The defendant has taken no steps whatsoever in respect of the challenge despite being served with the proceedings. Accordingly, once the time limit for the defendant to take steps in the proceedings had expired, they were set down for a formal proof hearing. [6] The matter proceeded by way of formal proof on 27 April 2010. Mr Poulter himself gave evidence confirming the allegations contained in his amended statement of claim, his brief of evidence and other documentation. I