Search Results

1. FP v TK [2016] NZDT 1044 (20 January 2016) [pdf, 110 KB]

   ...apportioned? Did Ms TK cause at least $15,000.00 worth of the damage to Ms FP’s car? Did Ms FP stop in time to avoid hitting the front car, or did she crash into the front car before being hit by Ms TK’s car? [4] The relevant law is the tort of negligence, which applies when someone breaches a duty of care to another person causing foreseeable damage. Drivers have a duty of care towards other drivers, which includes compliance with the provisions of the Land Transport Act 1988...

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

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2022] NZDT 153 APPLICANT KQ RESPONDENT HDC Ltd SECOND RESPONDENT HD The Tribunal orders: HDC Ltd and HD are to pay KQ $2,600.00 on or before 21 October 2022. Reasons 1. On 16 April 2022, at about 7.20pm, vehicles driven by KQ and HD collided at the intersection of [Street 1], [Street 2] and [Street 3] in [Cit

3. NB v UJ Ltd [2021] NZDT 1498 (23 April 2021) [pdf, 187 KB]

   ...his property? c. Are the costs claimed reasonable to put NB back in the position he would have been had the damage not occurred? Was UJ LTD negligent in pouring the concrete so that it splashed into an adjacent property? 4. Under the law of negligence trades people owe a duty of care to the occupiers of properties neighbouring the area in which they are working. That duty requires them to take reasonable care to avoid damaging neighbouring properties and goods on those properties wh...

4. TB v TN & LN [2024] NZDT 50 (14 February 2024) [pdf, 171 KB]

   ...damage to the applicant’s car. This was in the applicant’s driveway. The applicant says the second respondent, LN was responsible, and was driving TB’s vehicle which collided with a pole. TN is LN’s mother. 2) The relevant law is the law of negligence. The issues to be determined by the Tribunal are: a) Was LN responsible for the damage to the applicant’s car set out in the claim? b) If so, what would be a reasonable sum to award the applicant for compensation? c) If LN is re...

5. XS v UQ [2024] NZDT 132 (19 March 2024) [pdf, 184 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 132 APPLICANT XS RESPONDENT UQ APPLICANT'S INSURER (if applicable) B Ltd The Tribunal orders: UQ is to pay $8,100.42 to B Ltd by 7 April 2024. Note: The parties appeared by teleconference for the hearing. UQ was disconnected from the call after being warned about her continuous use of offensive language and her i

6. SU & WH v BT [2024] NZDT 79 (26 February 2024) [pdf, 102 KB]

   ...GST. 3. The issues to be determined are: a. Was BT responsible for the collision? b. If so, what are the reasonable costs associated with the collision that she ought to pay? Was BT responsible for the collision? 4. Under the law of negligence, drivers must take care not to drive in a manner that causes damage to another vehicle. The Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004 sets out the rules that drivers must obey. Rule 2.1 provides that unless that rule provides otherwise, dri...

7. Public-Place-Amendment-Paper_FINAL.pdf [pdf, 571 KB]

   ...Alida Mercuri, General Manger, Criminal Justice Policy, Ministry of Justice Purpose 1. This aide-memoire outlines: • Crown Law’s advice about how the gang insignia display offence applies when insignia are displayed from inside a private vehicle in a public place, • the implementation implications of this advice for Police, and • options for next steps on the Gangs Bill. Key messages 2. The Gangs Bill seeks to criminalise the knowing display of gang insignia in a publ...

8. BT v HT [2024] NZDT 353 (7 May 2024) [pdf, 138 KB]

   ...his insurer had declined the claim. The insurer could not be contacted for the hearing because it had not supplied a phone number suitable for a teleconference hearing. The absence of a party does not prevent the hearing going ahead. 4. The tort of negligence applies when someone breaches a duty of care to another person causing foreseeable damage. Drivers have a duty of care towards other drivers, which includes compliance with the provisions of the Land Transport Act 1988 and the Land T...

9. DE v SC [2023] NZDT 499 (10 October 2023) [pdf, 205 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 499 APPLICANT DE RESPONDENT SC APPLICANT'S INSURER (if applicable) J Ltd The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Background 1. SC and DE were involved in an accident at the intersection of [Street 1] and [Street 2] on 26 November 2022. 2. The accident took place at night, in rainy condition

10. GB v B Ltd & Ors [2024] NZDT 604 (24 May 2024) [pdf, 95 KB]

    ...is responsible for the collision? b. If so, are the costs claimed reasonable to put the innocent back in the position they would have been if the collision had not occurred? Which party is responsible for the collision? 5. Under the law of negligence all drivers owe other road users a duty of care. Drivers must take care not to drive in a manner that causes damage to another vehicle. The Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004 (LT Rule) states the rules that all drivers must abide by....