Search Results

1. SW v IA [2023] NZDT 363 (28 June 2023) [pdf, 92 KB]

   ...is the remedy? Did IA induce SW to buy the cameras by misrepresenting that they had free lifetime cloud storage? 4. The general law of contract and the Contractual and Commercial Law Act 2017 (CCLA) apply. 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 the...

2. IT Ltd v HI Ltd [2023] NZDT 572 (29 November 2023) [pdf, 93 KB]

   ...together with $23.56 in penalty interest to date, $628.00 for the statutory demand, and $519.27 in other collection costs. HI Ltd did not pay, and IT Ltd now seeks payment of the invoice with interest and collection costs. The amount stated on the claim form was $5,502.69, but this seems to be an error, being the total of the invoices originally referred to debt collection. 3. The issues to be determined are: a) Is HI Ltd entitled to deduct more in damages for the door? b) Is IT Ltd e...

3. NI v FI & MI & GI [2023] NZDT 592 (13 October 2023) [pdf, 96 KB]

   ...respondents damaged the aircraft when moving it, and as they are not responsible for any deterioration after it was delivered to NI’s shed, the claim is dismissed. Referee: K Edwards Date: 13 October 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...

4. SQ v X Ltd [2022] NZDT 195 (14 December 2022) [pdf, 179 KB]

   ...NN purchased the jewellery for her from the [shop] in [country]. 2. In the contract that SQ has with X Ltd, she agreed that she would: ‘provide a detailed description of the loss, damaged or stolen items, proof of ownership and any other information or evidence we ask for’ and ‘co-operate with us and give us any information or help we ask for’. 3. The sticking point for the parties is that SQ has not provided proof of ownership of the $20,000.00 bracelet and ring th...

5. BX v F Ltd [2024] NZDT 12 (21 February 2024) [pdf, 131 KB]

   ...filing fee, in certain limited circumstances, none of which apply in this case. For this reason, I do not find that the applicant can claim this fee. Referee: K. Armstrong Date: 21 February 2024 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...

6. HT v Q Ltd [2024] NZDT 2 (5 January 2024) [pdf, 197 KB]

   ...of its invoice for $1,552.50. 4. The issues to determine are as follows: a) What are the relevant terms of the contract? b) Did Q Ltd overcharge HT for its cleaning services? What are the relevant terms of the contract? 5. A contract is formed when both parties decide to exchange something of value, creating an obligation to perform a particular duty which is legally enforceable. The terms of a contract define the rights and obligations of the parties. 6. HT said that she had e...

7. TC v NU [2023] NZDT 707 (19 December 2023) [pdf, 194 KB]

   ...[13] I have not allowed the cost of the Disputes Tribunal filing fee. The Tribunal’s very limited jurisdiction to award costs does not include that fee. Referee: C Hawes Date: 19 December 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...

8. OT v KC & ZX [2023] NZDT 693 (14 December 2023) [pdf, 178 KB]

   ...discovered the camera was not in the box, but another item was. 3. OT seeks $330.00 the amount paid for the camera and its postage. 4. In the process of KC being served the claim, ZX contacted the Tribunal identifying himself as the son of KC. He informed that KC had died and produced a death certificate. He further informed the Tribunal that he was the person that had completed the camera auction on [the online platform] using his mother’s account. He is the identifiable and connect...

9. SD v W Ltd & X Ltd [2023] NZDT 407 (22 August 2023) [pdf, 198 KB]

   ...these reasons I find the correct respondent to this claim is X Ltd. CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 2 of 3 Is X Ltd in breach of its obligations to refund SD? 6. The relevant law is the law of contract. In this situation the contract was formed between SD (through his agent, [Travel Agent]) and X Ltd by way of the purchase of airline tickets. 7. SD states he outlaid $2231.75 for return flights from [City 2] to [Country]; leaving [City 2] 2 May 2020 and returning 8 May 202...

10. Q Ltd v B Ltd [2023] NZDT 438 (11 July 2023) [pdf, 112 KB]

    ...from UE on 9 January 2023 arranging for the two course enrolments. E-mail confirmation of the enrolments was sent to UE's personal e-mail address. 6. On the morning of the courses, being 10 January 2023, UE and MX completed Learner Enrolment Forms which on the second page have space for details about who is paying the bill. 7. Both UE and MX ticked “company account”. UE provided the name “[B Ltd]” and EU provided the name “[B Ltd]” and gave an e-mail address for t...