Search Results

1. [2024] NZEmpC 44 Maheta v Skybus New Zealand Ltd [pdf, 266 KB]

   ...September 2020, through its counsel, in a letter addressing each of those categories. In some cases the response stated the documents sought had already been supplied, in others that what was asked for never existed or no longer existed, and some requests were rejected as irrelevant. The defendant did not formally object to the notice requiring disclosure. [9] Matters rested there until 20 June 2023 when the plaintiff applied for an order that the defendant comply with its disclo...

2. O Ltd v Z Ltd [2024] NZDT 859 (2 October 2024) [pdf, 154 KB]

   ...23. KI said that when AZ rang him on 20 November, he asked AZ how long the chickens had been without food. AZ told him that he thought it had been a day, but he was not sure. 24. KI argues that this amounted to a representation by AZ that formed part of their contract and that he “agreed to picking up the birds the next evening 21st November on the condition that the birds had not been without feed for more than 12 hours”. 25. AZ agreed that he said to KI that he did not

3. DG v CM [2024] NZDT 207 (7 February 2024) [pdf, 177 KB]

   ...prior to the sale and advised that the car should not be driven as further damage could be caused and it was unsafe. [Mechanic workshop] owner KI confirmed in writing that the invoice had been modified from the original, and that CM had also been informed verbally that the issue made the car both liable to further damage if driven with the fault unrepaired, and unsafe to drive. 8. Issue: Did CM misrepresent the condition of the car to DG, thereby inducing DG to enter the contract...

4. LD v BD Ltd & BT Ltd [2023] NZDT 560 (24 November 2023) [pdf, 193 KB]

   ...truck and load. [5] LD is clear in his evidence that he was never told of any possible damage to his driveway, that there was no site visit before delivery, and he was not provided with a written contact. He does admit however that he received information via email and had telephone conversations with a salesperson from BT Ltd about delivery method. LD also admits that because the delivery was in October 2021, he cannot be sure a site visit did not take place before delivery, but he is su...

5. DQ v C Ltd [2024] NZDT 642 (9 September 2024) [pdf, 172 KB]

   ...RESPONDENT C Ltd T/A EN The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons: 1. DQ bought a [petrol car] from EN in November 2021. In June 2024 DQ’s car broke down. He received roadside assistance from U Ltd who informed him the current battery installed in the car was incorrect and was for a [hybrid car] and not for a petrol car. 2. DQ claims he was sold a car with a battery that was not fit for purpose and now claims in the Disputes Tribunal for $757...

6. Gibbons v Armour Guard [2018] NZHRRT 10 [pdf, 247 KB]

   ...Anderson (General Manager) Mr S Morgan (National Risk Manager) and Mr J Harnett (National Key Account Manager) for Armour Guard DATE OF HEARING: heard on the papers DATE OF DECISION: 29 March 2018 DECISION OF TRIBUNAL STRIKING OUT CLAIM AGAINST ARMOUR GUARD1 [1] In February 2015, an incident occurred at the Paeroa WINZ office which resulted in Mr Gibbons receiving a criminal conviction. Ms Thurgood, an Armour Guard employee,

7. [2024] NZLVT 023 - YMCA North Inc v Auckland Council (1 May 2024) [pdf, 415 KB]

   ...valuation, there was no evidence of any betterment and his evidence was a “major and unnecessary distraction”.4 YMCA submits there are no special reasons that would disentitle it to costs under s 90(3) PWA. YMCA accepts that the amount claimed was higher than what was ultimately awarded. However, YMCA submits the amount claimed was not unreasonably high having regard to the compensation awarded or the evidence before the Tribunal. There was no comparable market evidence f...

8. DC v JBD Ltd [2021] NZDT 1379 (11 March 2021) [pdf, 203 KB]

   ...APPLICANT RI APPLICANT SB APPLICANT YE RESPONDENT JBD Limited The Tribunal orders: Claim Dismissed. REASONS: Brief Details of Claim CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 2 of 4 1. In 2006, the ten applicants formed an art collective named BD. Over time, the collective purchased a number of paintings. On or about 2016, BD decided to sell all of its paintings. BD arranged with JBD Ltd (JBD) to sell the paintings through JBD’s gallery in [Redacted l...

9. JC v KB [2019] NZDT 1387 (3 July 2019) [pdf, 152 KB]

   ...parties agree on any amount of payment to Ms C for the damaged car? Did Mr B borrow money from Ms C during the relationship, and what amount, if any, is owed? 5. I find that any money given by Ms C to Mr B during the relationship was on an informal basis and repayment is not enforceable as there was no intention to create legal relations. This conclusion is supported by the fact that there was no record kept of amounts owed and repaid in any form that the parties agreed to. In ad...

10. E Ltd v MN as trustee of NC Family Trust & OC [2024] NZDT 182 (22 July 2024) [pdf, 165 KB]

    ...agreed and Ms MN decided to remain the sole trustee from 5 March 2021 and has benefited from the trust property including two houses since that date. [7] As a trustee at the time the applicant was instructed to provide the services and the work was performed and invoiced, Ms MN is liable to pay for the services she requested. If she has a claim against her former husband, that is a separate matter and is not grounds on which to withhold payment from the applicant. Referee: Hannan...