Search Results

1. 2025 NZPSPLA 074.pdf [pdf, 106 KB]

   ...photograph of Mr Shaw and Mr Miller wearing their security uniforms while shopping at a supermarket. [17] It is a contravention of s45 of the Act for a security business or licence holder to employ, engage as a contractor, or permit to act as a responsible employee any individual who does not hold a COA. [18] Mr and Mrs Shaw accept they gave Mr Miller a House and Farm Security Service Uniform which he wore when accompanying Mr Shaw and on other occasions. They also held him out to...

2. Merso v Accident Compensation Corporation (Leave to Appeal to High Court) [2025] NZACC 096 [pdf, 216 KB]

   ...described Ms Andrews’ report as “very thorough and comprehensive”. The primary areas of disagreement between the two reports were identified – hours for a therapy programme; nighttime support; and the amount of care attributed to parental responsibility. Judge Spiller found Ms McGarry made different judgment calls on these matters, but this did not constitute clear evidence that Ms Andrews’ overall assessment was made on wrong principles. d) Following the needs assessm...

3. KF v D Ltd & BU [2025] NZDT 140 (31 March 2025) [pdf, 190 KB]

   ...an amber light. 3. KF seeks $10,188.99 for damage to his personal property and the pre-crash value of the motorbike which was not economic to repair. 4. The issues to be resolved are whether D Ltd and its driver BU are at fault and therefore responsible for compensating KF for his losses. Are D Ltd and BU at fault? 5. Under the law of negligence all drivers owe other road users a duty of care. The duty of care requires drivers to drive to the standard of a reasonable and prud...

4. [2025] NZEmpC 213 Carr v Hamilton Civil Plant Ltd (Oral judgment of Judge Beck, 18 September 2025) [pdf, 208 KB]

   ...primary purpose of a compliance order is to compel the defaulting party’s compliance, but that there is a further purpose – to impose a sanction for non-compliance.10 [30] Breaching a compliance order is a serious matter and warrants a serious response. The Authority, the Court and the parties are entitled to expect orders to be obeyed and it is likely to be in only reasonably rare cases that non-compliance would be excused. Therefore, a sanction is called for. [31] Having...

5. Civil enforcement forms

   ...enforce a judgment order more than 6 years old. Find out about enforcing a judgment order older than 6 years Third party claim A third party Tell the creditor and the court that you have a financial interest in property seized and by a bailiff. Response to third party claim A creditor Tell the court if you accept a third party claim. You can also ask the bailiff to release the property. Notice to bailiff: suspend enforcement and authority to re-enter A creditor jointly wit...

   Located in:

   1. Fines & payments >
   2. About civil debt

6. KH v IC [2025] NZDT 182 (15 May 2025) [pdf, 136 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2025] NZDT 182 APPLICANT KH RESPONDENT IC APPLICANT'S INSURER (if applicable) B Ltd The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons 1. On 2 January 2021, KH was driving his [vehicle] on [Street], [Town] in a westbound direction. IC was riding his motorcycle on the same road in an eastbound direction, following his brother who

7. LCRO 27/2025 EG v HJ (25 August 2025) [pdf, 151 KB]

   ...been presented and argued in a different way; (d) the main premise of the Court’s judgment dismissing the application to sustain the caveat was that it argued for a different interest from the interest expressed in the caveat itself; (e) the responsibility for that outcome likely lay with the barrister who prepared the application and supporting evidence and who argued the application; (f) “it cannot be said that the caveat was certainly doomed to failure or that the weaknesses...

8. Waikato Bay of Plenty Standards Committee v Cooper [2015] NZLCDT 7 [pdf, 49 KB]

   ...after reporting its decision and penalty, the Tribunal received a copy of a letter written by Mr Birks on 13 March 2012 advising the respondent that the date of 28 May 2012 set for the hearing was a final remand. That letter is important. In a response to a question from the Chair, the respondent stated that the first he knew of the 28 May 2012 date of hearing was when he appeared in Court with his client on 4 May 2012. That was plainly a lie given that he had Mr Birks’ letter a...

9. Waikato Bay of Plenty Standards Committee v Bean [2016] NZLCDT 7 [pdf, 34 KB]

   ...a less significant role than they do in sentencing.” [13] In this instance both counsel accept that the conduct concerns a single event. It is accepted that the conduct is very serious, but the actions of the practitioner in fully accepting responsibility for her actions and taking steps to remove herself from the profession and seek medical help and therapeutic support do provide substantial mitigation. [14] The practitioner has an unblemished disciplinary record and has practis...

10. NI v T Ltd [2025] NZDT 187 (2 May 2025) [pdf, 102 KB]

    ...truck to the storage yard. As a form was completed, and as NI did authorise the tow personally, and did willingly leave his vehicle at the storage yard, I find any failure to obtain a signature, should it have been necessary, does not absolve him of responsibility for storage fees. The claim for a refund of fees and non liability on the basis of the tow authority cannot therefore succeed. Is the storage price reasonable? 7. NI has claimed the fee charged for storage is excessive....