Search Results

1. CL & HD v T Ltd & S Ltd [2023] NZDT 72 (14 February 2023) [pdf, 223 KB]

   ...report. I find that the cost of this report is a consequential loss claimable under the CGA in this case. Therefore, S Ltd must pay CL and HD, $20,348.30. Referee: Ms Gayatri Jaduram Date: 14 February 2023 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...

2. KP v MN [2023] NZDT 776 (20 December 2023) [pdf, 211 KB]

   ...owner, but was unable to do so according to [the insurer]. The parties reached an agreement that MN would compensate KP $100.00 for the loss of the warranty. At this time, KP asked MN if any major repairs had been carried out on the car. MN then informed KP that there had been an engine coolant issue that was repaired 10 days before the sale. On 2 June 2023, when KP was driving the car to the post shop, the engine coolant lights went on and started to ‘beep’. The car was towed to...

3. SX v Q Ltd & TX [2024] NZDT 112 (9 February 2024) [pdf, 196 KB]

   ...management company but Q Ltd repeatedly failed/refused to do so. 14. The day before the first hearing on 5 October 2023, Q Ltd made a substantial written submission, which included multiple inspection reports that SX had never seen before, in a format inconsistent with previous reports. 15. SX files this claim seeking $25,524.32 for a partial refund of management fees and damages for multiple breaches of contract. 16. TX was joined as a second Respondent after the first hearing d...

4. QX v XN Ltd [2024] NZDT 110 (16 April 2024) [pdf, 207 KB]

   ...service since it was purchased by the first owner. QX said the oil had been changed and he had done some routine checks, but accepted that there had not been a full service. There was some discussion about how often a full service should have been performed, and about the manufacturer’s guidelines for this. I do not consider that I need to make a finding on this because it was accepted that there had not been a full service of the motorhome at all since it was purchased new. 13. XN...

5. TL & UL v Q & QT Limited [2024] NZDT 145 (12 April 2024) [pdf, 167 KB]

   ...great majority of contracts is governed by Part 2 Subpart 3 of the Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 (CCLA). Sections 36 and 37 set out when a party has the right to cancel and section 42(1) provides that when a contract is cancelled, all unperformed obligations cease and the cancellation terminates the whole contract (but the secondary obligations such as any duty to pay damages survive). Section 43 of the CCLA then gives the court discretion to grant relief having regard to relevant...

6. BU & QU v X Ltd & EP [2024] NZDT 133 (12 March 2024) [pdf, 201 KB]

   ...remedy the failure of guarantee in relation the fence in a reasonable time, I find that there is no remedy available to BU and QU and their claim is dismissed. Referee Perfect Date: 12 March 2024 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...

7. NX v T Ltd & S Ltd [2024] NZDT 234 (8 March 2024) [pdf, 187 KB]

   ...tap was likely $120.00. T Ltd and S Ltd are jointly liable to NX for this cost. 22. Therefore, T Ltd and S Ltd are to pay NX $120.00 by Friday 29 March 2024. Referee: C Price Date: 8 March 2024 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 rehe...

8. TD v MT [2024] NZDT 173 (10 April 2024) [pdf, 225 KB]

   ...suggested that MT find alternative accommodation. 22. MT filed some documentation prior to the hearing in this matter. At no stage in the documents filed did he dispute that it was agreed that he would pay $280.00 per week rent. Much of the information submitted by MT was in relation to other incidents which were the subject of a CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 3 of 4 complaint by him to the Police. TD told the Tribunal that the Police had spoken to him about those matters and no furt...

9. BL & KL v QT [2024] NZDT 206 (12 April 2024) [pdf, 114 KB]

   ...with reasonable care and skill, it a tradesman-like manner and to a tradesman’s standard. 16. As this was a “cash” job, there is no contract documentation of the scope of work, the price or the terms, except for the roof, therefore the information available to the Tribunal is limited and much of it is in dispute. The burden of proof is on the Applicants. 17. There is extensive evidence that the workmanship was defective, with overspray and paint drips on many interior and ex...

10. UI & II v SG [2024] NZDT 224 (6 March 2024) [pdf, 207 KB]

    ...the time as being 9 years old , based on them having bought the property 8 years before, and ‘it seeming quite new at the time’. SG has provided evidence from neighbours about the age of the driveway. This included a written statement from the former owner of one of his properties, Mr L, who lived at [property 1] for over 25 years, who stated that in the time he had CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 3 of 4 lived there, up until 2021, “I do not recall seeing any major alterations to t...