Search Results

1. [2019] NZEmpC 40 Berry v The Chief Executive of the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment [pdf, 328 KB]

   ...The disagreement between Mr Berry and Ms Campbell concerned different recollections they each had as to what occurred and what was said between them over it. [5] The dispute escalated when Ms Campbell made a request to Mr Berry for a written statement of the events leading to the investigation meeting. Mr Berry, in his account, stated that he gave his office desk phone to Ms Campbell so that she could listen to a telephone message left on Mr Berry’s telephone by the litigant wh...

2. Hawke's Bay Lawyers Standards Committee v Mr E [2016] NZLCDT 30 [pdf, 30 KB]

   ...matters were such that we were satisfied that Mr E certainly did not intend to mislead the Court and that it is likely at the time, given his focus on information which he still awaited from his client, that he considered he was making an accurate statement. [6] The brief background is this. The client instructed the practitioner in about March 2013 in relation to a civil claim to be filed arising out of a search of his premises by the police, which he alleged resulted in them wr...

3. NN v US [2024] NZDT 77 (28 January 2024) [pdf, 100 KB]

   ...to damages for any loss suffered where a party to a contract has been induced to enter it by a misrepresentation, whether innocent or fraudulent, made to them by another party to the contract. A 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. One misrepresentation need not be the sole inducement to the contract, but it must be a signifi...

4. WU v QD [2021] NZDT 1613 (27 July 2021) [pdf, 270 KB]

   ...purchasing the caravan? Do the objective meanings of the alleged misrepresentations reasonably convey incorrect information? c. Can there be misrepresentations about matters which QD would not have been aware of? d. If there are any proven incorrect statements conveyed did they induce WU to enter the contract? e. If a misrepresentation is made out, what are the damages required to place WU in the position as if correct information had been provided ? Was there an “as is...

5. [2021] NZEmpC 166 Yakka Contracting Ltd v Naicker [pdf, 208 KB]

   ...Before doing so, Yakka is applying to this Court to make its own orders against him. [4] This proceeding for freezing and ancillary order against Mr Naicker was commenced by way of an application and supporting memorandum which attached a draft statement of problem to be filed in the Authority. It was supported by an affidavit of Mr Bruce Levien, the sole director and shareholder of Yakka, and an undertaking as to damages. In addition, draft proposed orders were filed. [5] Couns...

6. TD v KH [2023] NZDT 183 (18 April 2023) [pdf, 108 KB]

   ...the ute including the main chassis rails, radiator support, crossmember and other suspension components. TD took the ute to P Ltd who confirmed the chassis was rusty and needed to be replaced at an estimated cost of $14,472.75. 3. TD originally claimed $22,000 which included the cost of the clutch as well as the work required to remedy the rust. She reduced her claim to $20,000 as KH has paid the cost to repair the clutch. 4. The issues to be decided are: a) Did KH misrepresent...

7. McCarthy & Anor v CAC 20007 & Anor [2014] NZREADT 94 [pdf, 53 KB]

   ...mining. [13] Mr Galloway for the second respondent emphasised the lack of care that the appellants took in the purchase and their [attempt to] minimise their knowledge of the Waihi area. [14] Evidence was given to the Tribunal of the disclosure statement that Wrightsons now required agents to provide to anyone intending to purchase in the Waihi area. This is a comprehensive statement advising the potential purchaser that mining is a “prolific industry in and around the Waihi distr...

8. Broome v Auckland Council [2017] NZWHT Auckland 1 [pdf, 328 KB]

   IN THE WEATHERTIGHT HOMES TRIBUNAL TRI 2015-100-000009 [2017] NZWHT AUCKLAND 01 BETWEEN SIMON OVAN BROOME, ELIZABETH ANN BAIRD AND MATTHEW LANGLEY CARSON AS TRUSTEES OF THE SO & EA BROOME FAMILY TRUST Claimants AND AUCKLAND COUNCIL Respondent AND EQUUS INDUSTRIES LIMITED Second Respondent (Removed) AND AQUASTOP LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION) Third Respondent AND BOSTIK NEW ZEALAND LIMITED Fourth Respondent (Removed) Site inspection 5 October

9. WO v BN and ors [2024] NZDT 433 (13 June 2024) [pdf, 175 KB]

   ...laws in his claim, buying a car in a private sale does not give you the consumer protection available to those buying from motor vehicle dealers. In private sales, sellers are not required to disclose defects, even if they know about them, but any statements they do make have to be truthful and not misleading. A seller may be liable to pay damages for misrepresentation if they make a false and misleading statement, and that statement induces the buyer to enter into the contract (rather t...

10. NX v KT [2024] NZDT 777 (3 December 2024) [pdf, 182 KB]

    ...The second respondent is removed from the proceedings by consent. Reasons 1. On 25 May 2024, NX purchased a bag advertised as being from [a designer bag ] (“the bag”) from KT for $1,515 after seeing it advertised [online]. 2. NX claims that KT misrepresented the bag in the [online] advertisement. She claims the sum of $1,515, being the amount she paid for the bag of $1,500 plus postage costs of $15. 3. The relevant law is found in the Contract and Commercial Law Act 2...