Search Results

1. ND Limited v DD [2024] NZDT 163 (17 April 2024) [pdf, 171 KB]

   ...the Agreement for Sale and Purchase of a Business agreement between NS Ltd and KO & KQ. The agreement includes an asset schedule that lists a [coffee machine] and a [grinder]. The copy of the asset schedule provided to the Tribunal includes a statement, signed by Ms S (director of NS1), that the copy is “certified as a true extract from the list of fixed assets sold by NS Ltd to CG Ltd”. b. A written statement, signed by Ms S, stating: The coffee business operations of the...

2. KK v HL [2023] NZDT 290 (20 July 2023) [pdf, 233 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 5 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 290 APPLICANT KK RESPONDENT HL The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons: 1. In March 2023, HL advertised his 2004 [motor vehicle] for sale on [online website]. 2. On 9 April 2023, KK contacted HL saying she was interested in the car. 3. HL drove to KK so she could look at and test drive th...

3. [2019] NZEmpC 58 New Zealand Tramways and Public Passenger Transport Employees’ Union v Cityline (NZ) Ltd [pdf, 226 KB]

   ...Hearing: On the papers Appearances: T Kennedy, counsel for plaintiff P Caisley, counsel for defendant Judgment: 15 May 2019 COSTS JUDGMENT OF JUDGE J C HOLDEN [1] Having been wholly successful in its defence of the claim brought by the plaintiff (the Tramways Union), the defendant (Cityline) now applies for costs. For the purposes of calculation of costs, these proceedings were categorised as Category 2B under the Guideline Scale adopted by the E...

4. Smith v McCallum and Ross (Strike-Out Application) [2018] NZHRRT 47 [pdf, 1.3 MB]

   ...[6] On 11 June 2018, Mr Murray advised the Secretary that he had attempted to contact Mr Smith via telephone and email but had had no response. On 12 June 2018, the Secretary sent a letter by courier to Mr Smith at the address he had provided on his statement of claim and a further address provided by Mr Murray. The letter advised Mr Smith that: You must contact Mr Murray urgently so that he has proper instructions from you as to whether you intend continuing with this claim or whether i...

5. [2011] NZEmpC 116 Pollett v Browns Real Estate Ltd [pdf, 81 KB]

   ...Pollett says that as a result of the end of his working relationship with the company in August 2010, he moved to Australia. He returned to New Zealand for a short visit on Saturday 18 June 2011 and filed, in person, this application and a draft statement of claim at the office of the Employment Court on the morning of Wednesday 22 June 2011. Mr Pollett says that before 10 June 2011, when the period for challenging the Authority’s costs determination expired, he attempted to con...

6. [2018] NZEmpC 152 Watts & Hughes Construction Ltd v de Buyzer [pdf, 285 KB]

   ...[10] I agree that these are convenient and appropriate headings under which to consider the matters relevant to the exercise of my discretion in this case, albeit that I do so in a different order. [17] As Judge Perkins noted in P v A,6 the statements in An Employee v An Employer must now be read in light of the Supreme Court’s judgment in Almond v Read.7 In that judgment, the Supreme Court emphasised that the ultimate question in such a case is what the interests of justice r

7. [2018] NZEmpC 112 Kazemi v Rightway Ltd [pdf, 289 KB]

   ...Kazemi’s application for removal in the Authority; (e) the Authority’s determination of costs for that application; and (f) Ms Kazemi’s application for a stay of the Authority proceedings. History of the proceedings [3] Ms Kazemi filed her statement of problem in the Authority and applied for an order removing it to the Court. That application was opposed and the Authority declined to remove the proceedings.1 [4] Ms Kazemi filed a challenge to the Authority’s determi...

8. 2021 NZPSPLA 032.pdf [pdf, 108 KB]

   ...not enter an active logging site and did not in fact do so. At most the excavator driver may have been removing logs that had previously been felled but was not felling trees at the time. In any event the excavator driver records in his written statement that he drove over to where his partner and Mr M where to see what was going on. Mr M did not drive up to where he was working and there is no evidence he put himself or anyone else at risk. [9] There is also no evidence that Mr M d...

9. Brockie & Anor as Trustees of the Brockie Trust v Millington [2010] NZWHT Wellington 5 [pdf, 245 KB]

   Page | 1 IN THE WEATHERTIGHT HOMES TRIBUNAL TRI-2009-101-000060 [2010] NZWHT Wellington 5 BETWEEN PATRICIA ANNE BROCKIE and KENDONS TRUSTEES LIMITED as TRUSTEES OF THE BROCKIE TRUST Claimants AND KENNETH STANLEY MILLINGTON First Respondent AND CHARLES TRIBE Second Respondent AND ATTORNEY-GENERAL (Removed) Third Respondent AND PETER JAMES WATT and ROSINA JEAN CURRIE (Removed) Fourth Respondents AND STEPHEN PAUL STRADLING Fifth Respondent AND CU

10. SI v NI & DI [2022] NZDT 218 (29 November 2022) [pdf, 104 KB]

    ...misrepresentation which applies to contracts. A misrepresentation is a false statement of fact which is made before or at the time the contract is made, and which induces a person to enter into that contract. A vendor may also not make any false or half truthful statements. A person who enters into a contract based on a misrepresentation may be entitled to cancel the contract or claim compensation depending upon how significant the misrepresentation is. Was there a misrepresentation t...