Search Results

1. MU v QT Ltd [2024] NZDT 210 (4 March 2024) [pdf, 104 KB]

   ...in MU’s submissions, serves as a warning that any vehicles parked on the premises without authority will be issued a breach notice and will be liable to pay an infringement fee. There is no offer of parking services, and the elements required to form a contract are not met. 8. I note that MU’s submissions reference the Disputes Tribunal decision of OX v QT2 which is published on the Ministry of Justice website as a ‘Decision of Interest’. This decision is one of my decisions....

2. XS v HS [2025] NZDT 101 (22 May 2025) [pdf, 174 KB]

   ...co-workers or even friends. It is also necessary to determine whether or not there was any intention on the part of the parties at the time to enter into a legal relationship (for example, by drawing up a clear and specific loan agreement, however informal, and signing it). 9. I find, on the evidence available in this case, that there was no intention to enter into a legal relationship and any agreement is therefore unenforceable. Not only is any agreement unenforceable, but I find t...

3. LCRO 117/2022 VN v SC (16 May 2024) [pdf, 216 KB]

   ...actually paid for. [16] The respondent forwarded this email to Mr DS and Ms WT stating: My clients response – his points appear valid. We don’t even have the names of the patients. [17] The applicant said that Company B subsequently lodged two claims in the [Tribunal], one against Company A regarding the treatment of the retention fund and the other against Mr DS for breach of an alleged undertaking. The fact of the second claim was not evident until this review application wa...

4. DR v BU Ltd [2022] NZDT 199 (22 November 2022) [pdf, 135 KB]

   ...respondent or as a result of a call to the respondent by the owner of the carpark or the person who holds a permit to park there. 8. The applicants raised several arguments that there were inconsistencies about the way the tow was conducted and the information they were given after the tow. While this may have been the case, this did not negate the respondent’s right to tow the applicants’ car from private land. 9. The applicants also told the Tribunal that the respondent had a g...

5. LCRO 40/2021 PT v UT and RL t/a Law Firm A (28 April 2022) [pdf, 266 KB]

   ...Mr HT. [3] Mr HT set up a trust, the CTG Trust (“the trust”). At the time the trust was established (2005), Mr HT was a client of a [City A] based law firm, [Law Firm B]. 2 [4] In 2014, [Law Firm B] merged with the firm [Law Firm C], to form the firm [Law Firm A] ([LAW FIRM A]). [5] In December 2011, Mr HT had executed his last will and testament. Mr HT’s will appointed Mrs YW (his wife) as a discretionary beneficiary of his trust. [6] [LAW FIRM A] acted for Mr SZ and...

6. NH & RL v A Ltd [2024] NZDT 873 (15 November 2024) [pdf, 174 KB]

   ...either of them to cancel the contract? If neither party breached the terms of the ASP so as to give rise to a right to cancel the contract, then did they enter into an Agreement on or about 31 August 2023 to cancel the contract? 4. A contract is formed when there is an offer and acceptance, there is consideration between the parties, and the parties intend to be legally bound. The terms of a contract must be known and agreed to because the terms of a contract set out the rights and obli...

7. Te Manutukutuku Issue 37 [pdf, 5.7 MB]

   Haralua/Pipiri 1996 Number 37 May/ June 1996 Taranaki claims could be largest T he Taranaki claims, grouped to­ gether, 'could be the largest in the country', according to the interim Taranaki report. The report states that 'there may be no others where as many Treaty breaches had equivalent force and effect over a comparable time.' The Tribunal estimates the area of lands wrongfully expropriated at just under two million acres. The report also states that the

8. M Ltd v KC [2023] NZDT 26 (2 February 2023) [pdf, 145 KB]

   ...the Tribunal has the onus of proving his or her claim/counterclaim on the civil standard of proof which is the balance of probabilities (that is, that it is more likely than not). I would like to reassure the parties that I have considered all the information and evidence presented by them when making my determination on the issues, but this order only refers to essential evidence and information material to the issues and is not intended to be a full record of the hearings or of the infor...

9. EZ v LH [2021] NZDT 1585 (6 July 2021) [pdf, 193 KB]

   ...reasonable opportunity to review those submissions and respond to them. 19. For these reasons LH’s counterclaim against EZ is also dismissed. Referee: K. Armstrong Date: 6 July 2021 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 r...

10. NS v TN & C Ltd [2024] NZDT 544 (4 July 2024) [pdf, 110 KB]

    ...His comment is a general statement and there is no evidence of this. In any event I must consider the specific claim, not whether such things generally happen. 12. However, this does not exonerate TN. His mistake was that he had different platforms and didn’t realise he accepted the booking until 30 November. I note moneys are held with C Ltd not the host until moneys are released by C Ltd to the host around the time of the client’s stay. 13. Accordingly, TN breached s28 o...