Search Results

1. KQ v HDC Ltd [2022] NZDT 153 (28 September 2022) [pdf, 96 KB]

   ...7.20pm). HD is liable as the driver and in the absence of evidence to the contrary I find that the company, HDC Ltd, is vicariously liable, jointly and severally. 11. I confirm that joint and several liability means that HD and his company are both responsible to pay the debt to KQ, but this does not mean KQ is entitled to be paid twice for the sum that I order to be paid. Payment of the debt by either Respondent in full would discharge the obligation of the other Respondent. If...

2. [2022] NZEmpC 143 Lawton v Steel Pencil Holdings Ltd (in liq) [pdf, 203 KB]

   ...or subsequent directions conference 12/03/21 0.2 Disclosure, inspections and interrogatories 27 Inspection of Documents 1.0 Interlocutory applications (including applications for stay, security for costs) 12 Filing memorandum in response to application for costs 0.4 30 Preparation for submissions in respect to admissibility of Calderbank letter 1.0 Trial preparation and appearance for other proceedings 36 Plaintiff’s or defendant’s preparation of br...

3. IC v GN [2020] NZDT 1512 (19 March 2020) [pdf, 149 KB]

   ...such call having been received. [3] IC appointed an investigator to determine the validity of GN’s claim. SD refused to cooperate with the investigator. The information provided to the investigator by GN was contradictory. IC considered that the response of SD and GN to the investigation failed to satisfy the requirements of the insured under the policy document. In addition, IC was of the view that some of the information provided had been incorrect, incomplete and/or fraudulent....

4. [2022] NZEnvC 023 Karmakar v Auckland Council [pdf, 732 KB]

   ...the property lies ,vithin designated areas identified in Chapter K of the Auckland Unitary Plan. He then claims that the one and only implication is that proposed public works can be carried out at any time in the designated area. The authority responsible for carrying out the proposed public works, does not have to comply with Unitary Plan rules but they do need to notify the Auckland Council by submitting an outline plan of works ([17] of the memorandum). It therefore appears that...

5. LD v LT Ltd [2021] NZDT 1579 (12 August 2021) [pdf, 174 KB]

   ...purchased these components meant that she was her own designer. She chose the components, specified where they would go, and LT Ltd supplied and installed them as instructed. No doubt LT Ltd helped with the layout and mechanics, but the company was not responsible for the suitability of the visual aesthetics of the components. LD had every opportunity to examine the components she was ordering and assess the irregular fashion of the level of gloss of each surface. That was up to her....

6. [2021] NZEmpC 110 Reid v Ngati Rangi Trust [pdf, 177 KB]

   ...conduct which caused the Court to vacate multiple fixtures and make numerous amendments to timetabling orders and schedules; (c) The Calderbank offer already referred to. [9] The Trust notes that Mr Halse, the advocate for Ms Reid, has taken responsibility for much of the default in respect of the proceedings but says that does not cure Ms Reid’s liability. [10] Notwithstanding the level of costs award sought, the Trust confirms that it would accept $10 per week from Ms Reid...

7. AMLCFT Stat Review FAQ [pdf, 1.7 MB]

   ...the regime effectively achieve its purposes in the most cost-efficient way? • What can we do better? • What can we do without? The review is being led by the Ministry of Justice. It is being supported by other government agencies which have responsibilities for the AML/CFT laws. They are: • the Department of Internal Affairs, • Financial Markets Authority, • New Zealand Customs Service, • New Zealand Police, and • The Reserve Bank of New Zealand. Page 2/2 Ho...

8. UE & QO v CO Ltd [2023] NZDT 159 (23 March 2023) [pdf, 116 KB]

   ...c. Being repeatedly traumatised by CO Ltd d. Being forced to obtain an interest-bearing loan (of $9,000.0) to re-pay CO Ltd interest free loan (of $45,800.00). 10. The applicants contended that the above alleged behaviour was in breach of the Responsible Lending Code in the Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Act, the Fair Trading Act, Bankers Code of Ethics. 11. Putting aside that some of the matters complained of are time barred as they are outside the time limits imposed by...

9. BW x XT [2022] NZDT 202 (12 December 2022) [pdf, 96 KB]

   ...bullied and humiliated and harassed him causing him stress. 4. BW seeks all his rent paid of $3,486.00 returned to him and $1,514.00 for the stress he says has suffered. 5. XT has not contested any of this evidence. He did not file any defence or response to the allegations in the claim form. He did not attend today’s hearing. 6. This Tribunal has jurisdiction for claims in contract. The flat sharing agreement is a contract. The major benefit of a flat sharing agreement is the...

10. BB v H Ltd [2023] NZDT 10 (5 April 2023) [pdf, 98 KB]

    ...Issues i) What is the relevant law ii) Who is liable for the misdirected passage. Issue 1 [4] The relevant law is Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA). The CGA provides a guarantee as to delivery. Section 19 states; (1) Where a supplier is responsible for delivering, or for arranging for the delivery of, goods to a consumer there is a guarantee that the goods will be received by the consumer— CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 2 of 4 (a) at a time, or within a period, agree...