Search Results

1. INZ v BUH [2013] NZIACDT 45 (01 August 2013) [pdf, 86 KB]

   ...founding the complaint: “1. On 17 October 2012 an Expression of Interest (EOI) the adviser had submitted under the Skilled Migrant Category was selected from the pool. 2. The adviser had claimed 145 points, of which 10 points were claimed for a job offer outside Auckland and 40 points for two qualifications. One of these qualifications was a Licence Controller Qualification gained in New Zealand, and the other a Year 13 certificate from South Africa. 3. On 18 October 2012 the EOI wa...

2. BC v KG [2021] NZDT 1592 (4 August 2021) [pdf, 178 KB]

   ...of a kind ordinarily acquired for personal, domestic or household use, even if it was work occurring at premises used commercially given no contracting out of the CGA on written terms required exist. KG had earlier suggested that this was a ‘cash job’ and so the CGA doesn’t apply, but he accepted at the hearing that is not correct. 5. Under the CGA, among other things, KG’s work needed to be undertaken with reasonable care and skill and the concrete product would need to be acc...

3. 2022 NZPSPLA 049.pdf [pdf, 120 KB]

   ...himself to Court security as an investigation officer for CIS. He was wearing a stab proof vest with the word “investigator” printed on it, displayed a crown crest, and wore a photo ID card similar in look to a Security ID with his photograph, the job description “Investigation Officer” and the CIS Logo. [9] Mr Casbolt accepts he was working or attempting to work as an investigator but denies he was a private investigator. He however has not explained the difference betwe...

4. NO v UM [2023] NZDT 629 (21 November 2023) [pdf, 187 KB]

   ...provided in the amount of $1,200.00 for “one-off tidy up of gardens, trimming also, waste removed”. UM accepted the quote and the required deposit of $300.00 was paid. CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 2 of 3 9. The parties agreed that the job was scheduled to be done on 16th/17th October 2023. The gardener undertook the work on 16th October which involved using a weed whacker to cut down weeds, weed spray was used around the gardens, and waste removed from the site. 10. NO...

5. BV v JU [2023] NZDT 668 (27 October 2023) [pdf, 181 KB]

   ...JU. 6. JU declined to refund the entire amount on the basis that there was no written or other agreement around the circumstances under which a deposit would be refunded, and also that she and her husband had already purchased paint for the job (which was to begin the next day) and had turned away another job due to BV’s booking. She agreed to refund BV $5,000.00 of the $10,542.05 deposit paid and transferred that sum to BV’s account. BV seeks to have the full amount of the...

6. FB v TT Ltd [2022] NZDT 201 (17 July 2022) [pdf, 156 KB]

   ...contract. 4. I must interpret the usual everyday meaning of the words used in the contract to arrive at what the parties have agreed, therefore what is permittable or enforceable or not. 5. TT Ltd relies on 3 clauses in its written quote for this job which it says entitled it to increase the price stated in that quote some 5 months later. I deal each of these clauses below. 6. Page 2 of the quote paragraph 4 does not assist TT Ltd and does not apply. It states the quote is valid...

7. NH Ltd v NZ [2024] NZDT 159 (26 March 2024) [pdf, 179 KB]

   ...Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons: 1. In June 2020, NZ engaged NH Ltd to construct a driveway for his newly built home. On 31 July 2020, after the work was complete, NH Ltd invoiced NZ $30,111.60, but NZ was unhappy with the job and only paid $13,800.00. NH Ltd now claims $18,818.00, comprising the $16,311.60 balance of the invoice together with $977.50 for additional earth-moving, $1,287.50 for decking timber left on the property, and $241.60 in interest. 2. The i...

8. Q Ltd v S Ltd [2023] NZDT 772 (13 December 2023) [pdf, 158 KB]

   ...3. MK did not agree that TT used the wrong size pipework and refused to give RX the refund he was seeking. 4. RX had dyna testing carried out at a cost of $632.50, and provided MK with the results. MK did not change his view. 5. RX had the job redone at a cost of $685. 6. RX is claiming $1317.50 comprising the dyna tune charge of $632.50 and the amount of $741.19 charged by S Ltd. 7. The issues to be resolved are: a. Did TT provide a service that was fit for purpose? b....

9. NM & S Ltd v PT [2023] NZDT 679 (29 August 2023) [pdf, 186 KB]

   ...evidence that he quoted for “only for one side of the roof” and that this quote was initially off [maps]. I accept that he then returned for specific measurements and gave the final 80 sqm; b. I find that NM’s evidence is consistent with the Job Sheet site measurement plan, which I accept was completed immediately after the site discussion with PT. This shows 2 roofs and is clearly marked “this roof only” with an arrow to one roof; c. I preferred the company’s position tha...

10. DN v BO [2024] NZDT 430 (6 June 2024) [pdf, 184 KB]

    ...some security footage of a person slipping on the driveway. 7. BO says he contacted [paint company] and got detailed recommendations on the products and processes to use on the driveway. He says there was grit on the surface from the old paint job, and CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 2 of 3 he thought this would be enough to ensure the new surface would not be slippery and so he did not apply any more grit. 8. I am satisfied that the painting of the driveway is not fit for purpos...