Search Results

1. EB & KB v D Ltd [2023] NZDT 288 (11 November 2022) [pdf, 210 KB]

   ...respondent deprive the applicants of the chance to recover from the tenants the costs of: • cleaning curtains; • replacing net curtains; • household cleaning; or • repairing damage to the benchtop? b) Is the respondent contractually responsible for the termination of the fixed term tenancy? c) What sum, if any, should the respondent pay in compensation for any breaches? Did any contractual breaches by the respondent deprive the applicants of the chance to recover fro...

2. Political Lobbying Project: Feedback Summary [pdf, 115 KB]

   ...conduct, and the Ministry revised the code based on the feedback provided. 5. This document summarises the written submissions received by the Ministry of Justice from government relations consultants on the draft code of conduct. Summary of responses 6. Eight emailed responses were received from companies and associations in the government relations sector. 7. Feedback related to both the approach to a code of conduct and the draft code’s content. Those who commented on...

3. [2024] NZEnvC 121 Queenstown Lakes District Council v Silver Creek Limited [pdf, 330 KB]

   ...and co-operatively to the interim orders, QLDC submits that SCL’s conduct has not been egregious so as to warrant indemnity costs or an award of Council staff costs. 6 Affidavit of S de Reeper, affirmed 5 September 2023, at [71]. 5 Response to application for costs [14] No submissions were filed on behalf of SCL. Costs in the Environment Court [15] Under s285 RMA, the Environment Court may order any party to pay any other party the reasonable costs and expenses inc...

4. H Ltd v T Ltd & Ors [2023] NZDT 700 (19 December 2023) [pdf, 226 KB]

   ...resource consent purposes only and should not be used for site set out as the dimensions are not necessarily the set out points. T Ltd should have used A2111 instead. A0111 also contains a disclaimer not to rely on the measurements. B Ltd state ultimate responsibility lies with the builder to double check the site set up. 10. T Ltd was in possession of the set of plans. However NL, director of T Ltd, stated it was reasonable for him to use the master site plan as he requires all the dim...

5. SX v GO [2023] NZDT 686 (20 December 2023) [pdf, 107 KB]

   ...the pre-accident value of SX’s car, and had gone to some lengths before the first hearing to attempt to get a variety of panel-beater assessments about the repair costs presented to her by K Insurance. At the first hearing she provided 13 written responses she had received from 13 different panel-beaters about likely repair costs. She had not been able to provide them with full documentation about the repair authorised by K Insurance Ltd because she said she had received only limited pho...

6. CL v TU [2024] NZDT 82 (1 February 2024) [pdf, 101 KB]

   ...liable to pay him $21,853.22. 2. TU did not attend the hearing. At the first hearing I spoke to the liquidator of J Ltd who provided the Tribunal with contact details for TU. The notice of hearing and claim was sent to TU at this address, but no response has been received. I tried to ring TU on a number provided by the liquidator of J Ltd but my calls went straight to voicemail. The hearing went ahead without TU. 3. The issue to be resolved is whether TU is personally liable to pay...

7. [2023] NZEnvC 183 W North Limited v Wellington Regional Council [pdf, 1 MB]

   ...circumstances. It considers costs should lie where they fall and submits that at all times in conducting this proceeding it has acted pmdently and reasonably. Specifically, tl1e Council considers that it has acted in good faitl1 to discharge its responsibilities and functions under RNIA to protect natural wetlands, and updated its position in light of tl1e Adams judgment, at tl1e earliest stage available to it. Discussion [5] Section 285 of tl1e R1\11A confers a broad discretion....

8. Singh v Accident Compensation Corporation (Late filing to the District Court) [2024] NZACC 178 (11 November 2024) [pdf, 149 KB]

   ...Notice of Appeal, submissions to support leave being granted for the appeal to be accepted out of time. Mr Bhardwaj noted that Mr Singh had written to the Reviewer in the erroneous 2 belief they could extend the timeframe for appeal. No response was received. Mr Bhardwaj received instructions only on 16 October 2024. [3] On 24 October 2024, Mr Castle for the Corporation submitted that there was no material prejudice to the Corporation from the late filing, and the Corporation...

9. SP v MT [2024] NZDT 851 (21 October 2024) [pdf, 139 KB]

   ...other party. 2. A misrepresentation is a false statement of fact. Opinions and statements about some future performance are generally not statements of fact. Inducement refers to being persuaded. 3. A buyer in a private sale has his or her own responsibility to carry out their own due diligence before entering into a contract – that principle is referred to as buyer beware – caveat emptor. A seller is not obliged to point out faults or problems but answers to questions by the se...

10. 2024 NZPSPLA 078.pdf [pdf, 102 KB]

    ...Baker was working as a security consultant without a current certificate of approval (COA) to the Complaints Investigation and Prosecution Unit (CIPU) for investigation. The complainant also had concerns about whether Ms Baker was suitable to be a responsible security worker given media reports of a scheme in which she had been involved with an unrelated business. [2] CIPU’s investigation found: • Ms Baker was working as a security consultant for South Security for approxima...