Search Results

1. Jones v Accident Compensation Corporation [2016] NZACA 02 [pdf, 250 KB]

   ...date (Corporation’s memorandum 24 January 1996). Again, I do not know whether the decision is missing, but I have not seen it. The certificate is missing. I do not know if any review was sought. [24] On an unknown date, Mr Jones once more requested ERC, but was now claiming ERC backdated to the date of the accident on 5 January 1988. The claim document is not available. This is the claim which is the subject of the current appeal. 6 [25] On 8 March 1993, Dr B...

2. SI v KB & X Ltd [2024] NZDT 87 (7 February 2024) [pdf, 95 KB]

   ...contract, for which damages may be payable. 6. SI and X Ltd agreed initially that the house was to be cleaned to a standard referred to as an “exit clean”. KB had clarified what this meant in an email to SI, and when SI agreed, the contract was formed. SI later recalled that the pantry and an area under a sink needed particular cleaning and she agreed to pay extra for this work. CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 2 of 3 7. After the cleaning was meant to be completed, SI noti...

3. B v Southern Response Earthquake Services Ltd [2021] CEIT-2021-0006 [pdf, 336 KB]

   ...before they are sent to the Council; and 4. Mr B will apply for consent within 8 weeks of demolition being completed. 20) On 28 June 2017, Mr B emailed Southern Response referencing the earlier discussion with Ms F. The email states: I… informed you that we had moved out of our house and it could be demolished as soon as you were ready … I understand that our lawyer had informed you that we had moved out in Mid April which means the house has been empty awaiting demolition...

4. TE v OL [2024] NZDT 458 (28 May 2024) [pdf, 114 KB]

   ...deliberately obstructive in providing her with any service history of the vehicle. There can be many reasons why documents are not provided immediately they are asked for. Neither the respondent nor [the repair shop] had any obligation to provide the information requested, though have now done so. I take nothing from this. Had the applicant wanted a full service history of the vehicle she could have requested this prior to purchase and did not. It is now too late to required authorise servi...

5. BX & MT v MI [2024] NZDT 35 (22 January 2024) [pdf, 201 KB]

   ...included as a chattel. Did the respondent misrepresent the insulation under the floor? 20. The law relevant to this claim is the general law of contract and the Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 (CCLA). A contract is a binding commitment formed by an offer made by one party and a subsequent acceptance by the other party. There is a well-known principle of contract law which is “caveat emptor” or “let the buyer beware”. This implies that the buyer must be cautious, as t...

6. [2007] NZEmpC CC 20/07 O'Flynn v Southland DHB [pdf, 73 KB]

   ...further particulars in the Employment Court Regulations, rule 185 of the High Court Rules applies. The settled principles from authorities relating to that rule are that there must be sufficient particulars in a statement of claim to: • Inform the other party of the nature of the case as distinguished from the mode in which the case will be proved.1 • Prevent surprise. • Enable the preparation of evidence. • Limit and define the issues. [5] The difference between fact...

7. Waitangi Tribunal - issue 61 of Te Manutukutuku [pdf, 1.1 MB]

   ...under a quarter of the original confiscated lands. It located its blocks arbitrarily and without the consent of those Mäori affected. The hapu of Ngäti Ranginui, in particular, were affected by the unfair way in which land was returned. The form of title used for the return was individualised European tenure. Mäori customary title was thus abolished without the consent of owners. Copies of the Tauranga Raupatu Report at the release in 2004. Professor Keith Sorrenson, histo...

8. NT v T Ltd & L Ltd [2023] NZDT 724 (13 December 2023) [pdf, 187 KB]

   ...that one of the possible consequences of not paying for parking was the towing of his vehicle. 9. I accept NT intended to pay but was having difficulty downloading or accessing the app. However, as L Ltd said, it is unable to ascertain that information without some communication from the owner. It said if NT had rung the 0800 number to tell them he was having difficulty, his car could have been placed on the “no-tow” list. NT accepted he had seen the 24 hour phone number to call...

9. X Ltd v EK [2024] NZDT 784 (16 September 2024) [pdf, 110 KB]

   ...and overpriced. None of the authors attended and did a site inspection nor spoke with X Ltd. But advised in response to a letter from EK for them to provide guidance if EK’s material was factually correct. Having found contrary to some of that information, I am unable to then rely on the opinions and quotes. 20. EK further advised the time that the builders would take to build the deck is far less than that of which X Ltd have charged. However, whilst that might be the estimate of tim...

10. M v U [2019] NZDT 1309 (21 August 2019) [pdf, 216 KB]

    ...proceeding on the basis of the notice with half the cost recoverable). 9. I find that Mr M failed to comply with these requirements. Mr M sent a letter to Ms U dated 23 October 2018 about his intentions, but that letter did not contain the information required by s10. The letter failed to note that Mr M intended to switch the posts and rails to Ms U’s side of the fence, does not estimate the cost and does not specify the consequences of not responding. 10. As Mr M did not compl...