Search Results

1. NB v NF Ltd [2022] NZDT 143 (11 August 2022) [pdf, 135 KB]

   ...to might be unfair on one party. 16. This means that NB has not established her claim for a refund of the deposit paid and her claim is dismissed. Referee: R Merrett Date: 11 August 2022 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. EQ v ND Ltd & DQ [2023] NZDT 9 (5 April 2023) [pdf, 98 KB]

   ...contracted the Tribunal and again requested an adjournment on the basis that he was out of country and not reachable over the phone as he was in a remote area and the phone and internet is very limited. An adjournment was not granted. The Tribunal informed DQ that the hearing would proceed. [5] Whereas DQ advised that he made the latest adjournment request a week prior to his travel asking that the hearing be adjourned till 2023, the evidence is clear that DQ left the county knowing that...

3. Zhang v James Cook Hotel Ltd (Strike Out) [2025] NZHRRT 2 [pdf, 247 KB]

   ...government.17 [25] In this case, the Hotel argued that whether the wider view of what amounts to a political opinion (as was espoused in the Croatian Brotherhood case), or the narrower approach (preferred in BHP), is followed, Mr Zhang’s view which forms the basis of his claim, does not constitute a political opinion for the purposes of s 21 of the HRA. 13 BHP New Zealand Steel Limited v O’Dea (1997) 4 HRNZ 456 (HC) (BHP). 14 Croatian Brotherhood Union of Western Australia...

4. L Ltd v UT [2022] NZDT 266 (16 December 2022) [pdf, 167 KB]

   ...pay the sum of $850.00 to L Ltd on or before Monday 16 January 2023. Reasons: 1. On 1 August 2022, UT (the customer) signed a six-month Membership Agreement with L Ltd (the gym). The membership fee was $170.00 per month. The customer signed a form to pay by direct debit, but the account number provided was incorrect. The gym claims that no payment has ever been received, and the customer has neither attended the gym nor cancelled her membership. 2. The gym now claims $935.00, intend...

5. BC v J Ltd & M Insurance [2023] NZDT 513 (30 September 2023) [pdf, 182 KB]

   ...CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 2 of 5 b. If not, is BC entitled to $6,428.00 as claimed, or to any other sum? Has J Ltd correctly decided that the slipway damage is excluded under BC’s policy? 6. Contract law requires parties to perform the promises they make to each other, unless there is a valid legal reason not to. When questions of contract interpretation arise, a court considers what a reasonable and properly informed bystander would think the parties intended their wor...

6. HI v UD [2023] NZDT 359 (4 April 2023) [pdf, 201 KB]

   ...may have destabilised it. (d) HI provided one page of an EQC report on the slip which noted that the land on which the house sits is “cut and fill” from the construction of the road, and the road above is also on a “cut and fill” platform. The bank is therefore not a natural structure. This factor sets the case apart from the case law cited, as there would be additional considerations about liability for land where a slip has occurred from a man-made bank, rather than a na...

7. ES v LQ & TQ [2023] NZDT 79 (16 March 2023) [pdf, 213 KB]

   ...temporary repair. If so, the extent of the affected cladding and the reasonable cost to repair? 10. The law of contract applies. Parties to a contract are bound by express terms and implied terms. Express terms are those that are stated prior to formation of the contract. Implied terms are those that are obvious and go without saying. 11. I am satisfied that a small part of the cladding had not been properly fixed to the tiny home and required replacing. TQ has taken responsibility...

8. M Ltd v AAI [2023] NZDT 578 (11 August 2023) [pdf, 193 KB]

   ...TRIBUNAL [2023] NZDT 578 APPLICANT M Ltd RESPONDENT AAI The Tribunal orders: AAI is to pay the sum of $8,000.00 to M Ltd on or before Monday 28 August 2023. Reasons: 1. In August 2021, AAI submitted a Consignment Quote Request form to M Ltd for a [designer purse]. The form stated, “We only sell authentic items.” He shipped the purse to M Ltd in [Country]. M Ltd received the purse in September 2021, and an artificial intelligence-enabled authenticatio...

9. BM v X Ltd [2020] NZDT 1583 (23 June 2020) [pdf, 128 KB]

   ...by email. 6. In the hearing, I gave BM a copy of X Ltd.’s 31 March 2021 email, a copy of s 10 of the Disputes Tribunal Act and a copy of my 13 January 2021 order. I gave BM an opportunity to adjourn the hearing and seek advice about that information. He declined that opportunity. Therefore, I am making this decision on the information presented in the hearings to date. 7. The issue to determine is whether the Disputes Tribunal has the jurisdiction to hear this claim. Doe...

10. MD v D Ltd [2019] NZDT 1513 (12 August 2019) [pdf, 194 KB]

    ...claim, MD emailed the Tribunal to advise that a payment of $2,500.00 had been received from DL that morning reducing the amount claimed to $5,343.00 plus interest. [3] I have to decide: (a) who the parties to the contract were; (b) whether DL performed its obligations under its contract with MD; (c) if MD was entitled to cancel the contract; and (d) whether DL is liable to pay the whole or any part of the amount claimed. [4] The applicable law is the law of contract and the Co...