Search Results

1. EE v H Ltd [2023] NZDT 280 (10 August 2023) [pdf, 214 KB]

   ...the cost of the Tribunal filing fee as such costs are not recoverable in the Tribunal due to the provisions of section 43 of the Disputes Tribunals Act 1988. Referee: K. Edwards Date: 10 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 rehe...

2. DT v KI [2023] NZDT 294 (19 July 2023) [pdf, 195 KB]

   ...house is small, that you can hear anyone coming in the gate and can see or hear anyone in the lawn area from the window. She questioned the reliability of the person alleged to have attended the property to mow the lawns that day, who is now a former employee of DT, as she alleged DT had not immediately received cash payments given by her mother to this employee at an earlier service. 5. The price of the mowing service changed from $25.00 to $35.00 during the period claimed. DT sa

3. QI v PH & DN [2021] NZDT 1300 (10 February 2021) [pdf, 227 KB]

   ...not succeed and therefore the claim is dismissed, notwithstanding the finding in his favour that the common area driveway is for access only. Page 4 of 5 Referee: T Baker Date: 10 February 2021 Page 5 of 5 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...

4. DB & NB v R Ltd & D Ltd [2024] NZDT 439 (14 May 2024) [pdf, 220 KB]

   ...contract for carriage evidenced by their airline tickets, but that the airlines’ baggage rules for extra baggage are not part of this contract. 5. In the alternative, they argue that the contract relating to the baggage was amended, supplemented or formed on 28 February 2023 during an in-person visit to the airport. As a result, they are claiming for: • The difference between $NZD150 and $USD200 for five pieces of baggage CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 2 of 6 • The excess...

5. OIA-121121.pdf [pdf, 3.5 MB]

   Justice Centre | 19 Aitken Street DX SX10088 | Wellington T 04 918 8800 | F 04 918 8820 ContactUs@justice.govt.nz | www.justice.govt.nz 9 June 2025 Ref: OIA 121121 Tēnā koe Official Information Act request: Climate Change (Restriction on Civil Proceedings) Bill Thank you for your email of 3 April 2025 requesting, under the Official Information Act 1982 (the Act), information regarding the Smith v Fonterra litigation and the Climate Change (Restriction on Civil Pro...

6. ACE v ZXZ [2012] NZDT 136 (19 December 2012) [pdf, 69 KB]

   ...for its services in contract, or alternatively, on a quantum meruit basis. The facsimile sent by ZXZ to ACE constituted a contract between the parties even without any further oral enquiry on the part of ACE as to payment. [9] Services were requested which were over and above the normal services provided by ACE as part of its DHB contract and these services were provided. In the absence of any agreement as to price, ACE is entitled to reasonable payment for its services. W...

7. LCRO 158/2023 QMY v WAN (30 June 2025) [pdf, 241 KB]

   ...respondent, Ms WAN, about his professional conduct. What gave rise to the complaint? [2] The applicant was the director of an incorporated law firm. [3] On 10 August 2021, the respondent sought advice from a consultant to the firm, Mr X, about a claim for unpaid wages of $9,125. She paid a fee for the consultation which the applicant later said was $300. She signed a letter of engagement that day and paid a further $1,955. 2 [4] The letter of engagement provided for a fixed...

8. TS v BE [2024] NZDT 667 (30 July 2024) [pdf, 113 KB]

   ...this kind of wall chosen rather than some other wall?” If the real reason the particular wall or kind of wall was chosen was to bound land, it qualifies as a fence. If the real reason it was chosen was because it was necessary or appropriate to perform another function, such as retaining land, then it is not a “fence”. 6. After an adjournment to seek legal advice, TS submitted an opinion from her solicitor that the concrete block wall is not a “fence”. I concur. As the solicito...

9. ET v F Ltd & EN [2024] NZDT 562 (9 August 2024) [pdf, 199 KB]

   ...vicariously liable? 13. An employer will be liable for the act of an employee if there is sufficient connection between the employee’s act and his employment such that it would be fair to hold the employer liable for that act. Vicarious liability is a form of no fault or strict liability; the employer may still be liable, even where it has committed no wrongdoing albeit this will ultimately depend on the facts of each case. 14. EN had use of F Ltd’s company van for his work. I a...

10. Form 27 - Criminal legal aid - Tax invoice - schedule J [pdf, 367 KB]

    Templates V10 – July 2016 page 1 07/16 form 27 Legal aid file no. Tax Invoice Criminal Legal Aid Fixed Fees Schedule J Invoice date Invoice number GST number Lead provider’s ref. Charges/CRNs To: Legal Aid, DX Box Number City Name of aided person Name of lead provider Name of law firm Provider number Firm number Court type High Court Court of Appeal Parole Board Court location Details of clai...