Search Results

1. OF v D Ltd [2019] NZDT 1405 (9 August 2019) [pdf, 223 KB]

   ...extra. It simply formed part of the work for which the estimate was given. 16. The second category of additional costs arose from extra labour in having to re-do filler, etching and priming from the car remaining in storage for so long whilst the job was being done. Mr G assessed the extra labour required for this as being in the order of $3,000.00. I am satisfied that it was not contemplated at the time of the original estimate that the work would take place over such a long perio...

2. [2010] NZEmpC 42 Wang v Hamilton Multicultural Services Trust [pdf, 20 KB]

   ...original notice requiring disclosure, the following orders were made: 1.0 Employment agreements 1.1 The Migrant Internship Coordinator employment agreement will be listed. 1.2 The employment agreement of the Finance Manager will be listed. 2.0 Job descriptions [5] Job descriptions for the following persons will be listed: 2.2 Financial Administrator 2.4 Migrant Internship 2.5 Centre Cordinator 2.6 Finance Assistant 2.8 Interpreting Service Coordinator 2...

3. AEZ and AFA v ZUV t-a SR [2013] NZDT 225 (16 July 2013) [pdf, 59 KB]

   ...of the dates and hours he worked on the staircase. ZUV said that he threw his notebook page containing these details away when he made up the account, as is his usual practice. As a result, ZUV is unable to prove the hours he has spent on this job and I cannot have confidence that the hours he has charged represent the hours actually spent on the job. [12] I have decided to rely on the three alternative prices obtained by AEZ and AFA as representing a range of reasonable prices...

4. DU & HU c/- V Trust v UT Ltd [2021] NZDT 1591 (28 July 2021) [pdf, 105 KB]

   ...at the Property. On 31 May 2021, UT invoiced DU and HU for the balance of the quotation, which was $1,528.35 (“the Outstanding Balance”). DU and HU have not paid the Outstanding Balance because they are not satisfied with various aspects of the job. 3. DU and HU say that, after the new heat pump was installed, they were disappointed to find that there was damage to the wall below the new heat pump which UT had not told them would be a possibility. The damage consists of a small hol...

5. CU v QD Ltd [2022] NZDT 48 (19 May 2022) [pdf, 216 KB]

   ...any printing requiring special finishing such as laminating, creasing, folding will take one extra day to complete, and that “large orders will require an extended turn around time”. 8. She says next day delivery does not apply to a booklet job the size of CU’s which was a 3-4 day job and is considered a large order. NN said customers wanting a quick turnaround of an order of the nature and size of CU’s would raise that at the time of the order so that delivery time and cost...

6. SM v D Ltd [2023] NZDT 155 (10 May 2023) [pdf, 229 KB]

   ...says a drain on the deck had become blocked and water pooled, finding ingress behind the waterproof layer in one corner of the deck, which had caused damage to the ceiling and walls of a downstairs bedroom at her property. 2. D Ltd attended the job, NP for D Ltd saying that they ripped the vinyl floor surface out and found the plywood underneath to be ok, but that they could not see where the leak was coming from. They applied their surface coating — NP says they are not waterproofi...

7. P Ltd v V Ltd [2024] NZDT 377 (15 May 2024) [pdf, 178 KB]

   ...$1090.20 for drainage inspection camera work that was provided by P Ltd. It is not disputed that the work was done, but V Ltd considers the circumstances are such that it should not be required to pay for it. [2] OD said that P Ltd had done a number of jobs at CJ’s request on properties owned by clients of V Ltd, a property management company. He said that the normal procedure that had developed over about two years was that CJ would ask P Ltd to carry out an inspection and, if P Ltd (...

8. GD v TN & NN [2025] NZDT 92 (5 May 2025) [pdf, 208 KB]

   ...of $50, but this was not disclosed on the invoices, which were simply for a total sum. NN and SN were not aware that GD charged $50/hr for her labour until the first hearing of this claim. 18. GD did not review the estimate as the scope of the job grew. 19. GD said that NN and SN did not ask for this information, and they continued to pay the invoices, until the final one. 20. In terms of the final draft, NN’s statement said that she was “appalled at the disgraceful files sh...

9. CBC v KFTO [2012] NZIACDT 24 (25 May 2012) [pdf, 131 KB]

   ...all communication was by email. [9.2] Ms KFTO produced emails which included: [9.2.1] Emails in January 2010 relating to Ms CBC’s CV. [9.2.2] An email dated 1 February 2010 in which Ms KFTO inquired of Ms CBC “would [you] be interested in a job in Hawkes Bay? We have a vacancy for a head chef and there are 3 other [South Africans] working there. Please let me know soonest”. [9.2.3] An email dated 23 February 2010 in which Ms KFTO said “I can assist you with the entire proces...

10. [2023] NZIACDT 16 - WS v Lawlor (9 May 2023) [pdf, 234 KB]

    ...his conduct cannot be repeated. 5 [18] The complainant regrets her decision to seek his services. His negligence had cost her and her husband time and opportunity. In those three years, they should have put their effort into finding better jobs and refining their skills. It was exhausting and draining to chase him. His unprofessional behaviour put them through immense mental stress. He put them under significant financial pressure. They were both unemployed for a period b...