Search Results

1. Wellington Standards Committee v Sawyer [2013] NZLCDT 47 [pdf, 84 KB]

   ...Schedule 1. [2] The practitioner admitted a misconduct charge brought in relation to the behaviour in 2011 and the further misconduct charge relating to his behaviour in July 2004. He denied the remaining charge on the basis that his admitted negligence was not such as to reflect on his fitness to practice or tend to bring the profession into disrepute. This charge was in relation to his actions in July 2007. The hearing proceeded as a defended hearing in relation to the negligenc...

2. BV v U Ltd [2024] NZDT 677 (6 September 2024) [pdf, 124 KB]

   ...previous suspension of his driver’s licence. CS said that U Ltd was the underwriter for [an insurance provider], an entity or name used by U Ltd, and that she was speaking for both entities. [2] The facts were not in dispute. BV first insured his vehicle for an agreed value of $25,050.00 under a policy that commenced on 1 March 2020. At the time, BV had correctly answered “no” to the question: In the last three years has anyone who might drive the vehicle had their driving lice...

3. Overview for interpreters about common jurisdictions in the Courts and Tribunals [pdf, 184 KB]

   ...used for small claims up to $30,000. Each hearing is run by a Referee who will consider whether it is appropriate to help parties reach a settlement on a case-by-case basis. The tribunal hears cases involving disputes about car accidents or other vehicle issues, your house or flat, goods or services and business deals. Civil court: Cases are brought to the civil court by individuals or organisations and sometimes local or central government to help settle a dispute. These cases are u...

4. T Ltd v X Ltd [2023] NZDT 521 (28 September 2023) [pdf, 107 KB]

   ...accepts that it had authorised and approved the work and payment for it, but says that it has paid the sum owing. [2] The facts of this matter are, so far as they are known, not in dispute. T Ltd carried out repair work on X Ltd’s client’s vehicle in November 2022. X Ltd accepted that its client, the vehicle owner, had cover for the repair costs, and T Ltd invoiced X Ltd for $10,652.77, the cost of the necessary work. The invoice, dated 22 November 2022, stated T Ltd’s bank acco...

5. Thoman v Devi [2014] NZIACDT 26 (17 March 2014) [pdf, 118 KB]

   ...held. [5] Here there is a fundamental question of credibility on a serious issue. [6] The parties have sought to have the complaint decided on the papers. The Tribunal has accepted it should do that. The Tribunal has upheld the complaint based on negligence and incompetence but has dismissed the complaint to the extent that it is based on dishonest or misleading conduct. The complaint [7] The Registrar filed a Statement of Complaint. [8] The foundation of the complaint is an allega...

6. People discharged without conviction December 2017 [xlsx, 293 KB]

   ...discharged without conviction for homicide offences from 2013 is due to changes in offence categorisation. Prior to December 2012, offences for driving causing death and driving causing injury were a combined category coded to division 04: Dangerous or negligent acts endangering persons. From 2013 onwards, these offences were separated and offences for driving causing death (eg Careless or inconsiderate vehicle operation causing death (on a road)) were coded to 01: Homicide and related offences...

7. K Ltd v V Ltd [2023] NZDT 598 (27 November 2023) [pdf, 207 KB]

   ...there is insufficient evidence to prove that V LTD was misleading or deceptive in its conduct about the truck with K prior to the sale. Page 2 of 6 Does the contract contain an exclusion or limitation clause? 6. The parties signed a Vehicle Offer and Sale Agreement dated 26 April 2022, with V LTD as the seller and KQ Ltd trading as KE Ltd, listed as the purchaser, for the purchase of the truck. KQ Ltd changed its name to KC in September 2022. 7. The agreement contained...

8. OS & KB Ltd v KS & NS [2023] NZDT 187 (18 April 2023) [pdf, 153 KB]

   ...was instructing NS about using the brake and accelerator pedals at the time of the collision and had also taken responsibility for keeping a look out for other vehicles. CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 2 of 5 6. The law that applies is the law of negligence. The law that applies is the law of negligence. Drivers of vehicles owe a duty to drive with reasonable care and are responsible for any reasonably foreseeable damage suffered as a result of a failure to do so. The duty to take reas...

9. LCRO 180/2022 HB v UC and JW (26 November 2024) [pdf, 216 KB]

   ...Firm A] agreeing to indemnify Mr HB for any loss for which he may be liable to the new owners … for the difference (if any) in coverage.”14 [Law Firm A] response15 [24] [Law Firm A] submits that the complaints process is not the appropriate vehicle for this dispute and that Mr HB has remedies against the vendor. The Standards Committee determination [25] The Standards Committee identified a single issue to be addressed:- “39. The question for the Standards Committee was whe...

10. ENVC Hearing 6Oct14 WML evidence chief David Mitchell [pdf, 5.7 MB]

    ...parallel parking bays on the northern side of the road. There are also six angled parking spaces on the southern side of the road. 9. Traffic counts undertaken by Auckland city Council in April 2003 showed a weekday average traffic count of 4,200 vehicles per day (vpd). Counts undertaken by Auckland Transport on 13-16 January 2014 showed no change in overall volumes at 4,100 – 4,300vpd. 10. The ferry operation dominates the transport network in this area. Typically, bus...