Search Results

1. BM v NE [2023] NZDT 612 (6 November 2023) [pdf, 204 KB]

   ...Prior to purchase BM noticed some textured walls throughout a large portion of the house and was concerned these might contain asbestos. 3. Through a third-party BM asked NE whether the textured walls contained asbestos. 4. BM received an e-mail response from NE saying, “the textured walls are plaster over wallpaper and not asbestos they have a sponge finish.” 5. Given that statement by NE, BM purchased the house. 6. On the 26th of August 2023, BM discovered that the stat...

2. HC v T Ltd [2022] NZDT 214 (14 November 2022) [pdf, 106 KB]

   ...protection. 2. On 18 August 2022, HC returned the watch to T Ltd at no cost because he believed there was a material failure in the watch. Instead, T Ltd provided him with a quote for repair which he recalls was about $200.00 and shipping, and a response that it was not covered by the warranty. After he rejected the repair quote, the watch was returned. 3. HC claims $400.00 from the manufacturer T Ltd, which he says comprised about $350.00 to replace the watch and $20.00 shipping....

3. UM v QO [2022] NZDT 252 (12 December 2022) [pdf, 182 KB]

   ...misrepresentation is best explained as being a false statement of fact. An opinion and statements about some future performance are generally not statements of fact. Inducement refers to being persuaded. 9. A buyer in a private sale has his or her own responsibility to carry out due diligence before entering into a contract– that principle is called caveat emptor – buyer beware. A seller is not CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 2 of 3 obliged to point out faults or problems but ans...

4. [2023] NZEnvC 132 Wellington Regional Council v Goggin [pdf, 687 KB]

   ...proposing to resolve this matter by consent. The Court issued a minute on 13 June 2023, asking the parties to address some issues arising from the wording of proposed enforcement orders. The parties responded on 22 June 2023. I have considered that response and am satisfied the amendments made to the orders address the issues raised by the Court. [2] I am further satisfied that the attached enforcement orders under ss 314 and 316 of the Act, are appropriate to ensure the remediation...

5. Wellington Standards Committee 2 v O'Connor [2023] NZLCDT 17 (3 May 2023) [pdf, 100 KB]

   ...haven’t mentioned it already, he failed to account to his client beyond saying that he could work it out from the bank records. [6] We have found that he lied to us in relation to material matters and in particular we find that he was the person responsible for the various bank withdrawals referred to in the hearing as schedule 2. [7] The Standards Committee picked up the overture we have made, and applies for an order for interim suspension from practice under section 245. [...

6. [2024] NZEmpC 149 Osborne v Callaghan Innovation [pdf, 173 KB]

   ...considered a just sum to award. [6] In addition to submissions Mr Osborne provided copies of correspondence between his former counsel and Callaghan Innovation’s lawyers containing an offer made without prejudice save as to costs and the response to it. Analysis [7] The starting point for costs is sch 3 cl 19(1) of the Employment Relations Act 2000 (the Act). That clause empowers the Court to order any party to a proceeding to pay to any other party such costs and expense...

7. TC v UMA [2024] NZDT 260 (5 March 2024) [pdf, 100 KB]

   ...at new sites as they were added. That has occurred. Now that TC has had the retrofit done, he can super-charge his vehicle for free at any UMA charging site. 10. However, I do not find the implied term included an undertaking that UMA would be responsible for the costs of any upgrade or change needed to ensure future compatibility of TC’s car with new charging technology. As it was a reasonable assumption that the network would expand, so it would have been a reasonable assumption...

8. S Ltd v OB [2024] NZDT 226 (20 March 2024) [pdf, 119 KB]

   ...cars. He says that the driver ought to have seen the door open and ought to have been able to stop the bus to avoid a collision. Was the bus speeding? 4. S Ltd provided photographic evidence of the scene of the accident and the damage caused. In response to the claim that the driver was speeding, they provided GPS travel logs. The logs are triggered when a driver exceeds 50k in certain areas. The log for the date, time and location of the accident do not show any evidence that the bu...

9. BD v SL [2023] NZDT 6 (7 February 2023) [pdf, 109 KB]

   ...(c) Did the loss equal or exceed $500.00? Was a misrepresentation made about the height of the colt? 4. I find that BD inadvertently misrepresented the height of the colt. I have reached this conclusion for the following reasons: (a) In response to a request to measure, BD texted SL with a “rough measurement” of 145-6 cm and indicated there could be a further 2cm to grow beyond that. In fact, the colt has since been officially measured at 138.5cm. This is a potential diffe...

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

    ...purchased from BT Ltd was delivered by crane to his backyard by BD Ltd in October 2021. At hearing LD and BJ Ltd accepted BD Ltd had advised BT Ltd by email dated 7 October 2021 that it would accept delivery to LD’s property, but it would not accept responsibility if there is damage to the drive. [4] The question then becomes whether BT Ltd advised LD of possible damage to his driveway before it agreed to deliver the spa. BT Ltd claims LD was clearly told BT Ltd would not take liability...