Search Results

1. [2019] NZCAA 13 (5 August 2019) [pdf, 384 KB]

   ...arises from a routine circumstance in international commerce. Where a local company is owned by, or otherwise has common interests with, an offshore company, the pricing of supplies between the related parties may not be an arm's-length market price. Indeed, there may not be an arm's-length market price at all. That may occur due to intellectual property protection or unique technical advantages; in such cases, products and services may have only a single source, with no d...

2. TO Ltd v TX [2020] NZDT 1360 (11 December 2020) [pdf, 255 KB]

   ...in the original contract it was to be a concrete path estimated at $5100.00 plus GST but it was changed to Portland Stone (to be the same as the patio area). The variation order is for $7000.00 plus GST and there is a significant dispute over that charge, with TX saying he agreed to $7000.00 plus GST as the new total price for the path and TO saying that the variation order amount is in addition to the original estimate. 4. A separate price was negotiated and agreed for the supply and...

3. DD v H Ltd [2023] NZDT 536 (17 October 2023) [pdf, 214 KB]

   ...respondent. 2. The issues to be determined by the Tribunal were: a. What work did the parties agree the respondent should do? b. What price did the parties agree would be paid for the work? Did the respondent mislead the applicant as to its charges? c. If no price was agreed, was the amount the respondent charged a reasonable price? If not, what is a reasonable price? d. Did the respondent provide its services with reasonable care and skill? e. If not, what remedy is avail...

4. B Ltd v CT [2023] NZDT 239 (6 June 2023) [pdf, 185 KB]

   ...paying this final $3,368.70 for the following reasons: a. He believes that he has been overcharged for the extra 16.6 cubic metres of concrete. He believes that he should be charged for this at $439.30 (GST inclusive) per cubic metre being the price he was quoted, rather than $594.55 (GST inclusive) per cubic metre charged by B LTD. $ 2,577.15 b. Half of the cost of hire equipment from [redacted] to vacuum water and slurry from building foundation, which CT believes wa...

5. OU v H Ltd [2024] NZDT 264 (14 February 2024) [pdf, 171 KB]

   ...Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons 1. In August 2023, OU bought two tickets through [ticket company] for “[concert]” in [city] on [date], for $356.30 (which included afterpay fees). However, [city council] advertised a special price of $99.00 for the tickets, in a rates notice on 19 October 2023. 2. OU claims $203.30, which is the difference between the price she paid and the price she would have paid with the discount ($356.30 - $198.00 = $158.30) plus the f...

6. M Ltd v CQ [2023] NZDT 571 (17 November 2023) [pdf, 90 KB]

   ...TRIBUNAL [2023] NZDT 571 APPLICANT M Ltd RESPONDENT CQ The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons 1. M Ltd was engaged by CQ to provide digging services in preparation for siting of a tiny home. An initial price of $7668.18 was too high for CQ’s budget so the scope of work was adjusted and M Ltd provided a new price of $2730.05 which was accepted by CQ. 2. A dispute arose about the price after the work was carried out and CQ paid all but $...

7. HT v IU [2021] NZDT 1329 (13 April 2021) [pdf, 206 KB]

   ...of $16,204.00. 2) The respondent has paid the applicant for the contracted painting work the sum of $4,000.00. The applicant seeks an order for the balance of what he says is the sum quoted and owing to him. The respondent says that the quoted price of $16,204.00 was [I here paraphrase] grossly excessive. Mrs U should not be bound by it. 3) The relevant law is the general law of contract and the Disputes Tribunal Act 1988 (‘the Act’). The issues to be determined by the Tribunal...

8. NX & QT v X Ltd [2023] NZDT 209 (28 April 2023) [pdf, 107 KB]

   ...in purple. The fourth paragraph is relevant. Below that box is the button to confirm the booking. A person booking has to scroll past the purple box to confirm their choices. Fares quoted are per adult. Fares include applicable taxes and charges except where local airport departure fees are collected at departure. Card payment fee of $22.60 per person per one way journey may apply. CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 2 of 3 Bookings are not complete or accepted by [X Ltd] unt...

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

   ...price may be higher once the vehicle was inspected. I note that they were providing price estimates off limited photos, which did not include photos of the stripped vehicle showing significant internal damage to the rear panel and boot floor. Their prices ranged from $3000 to $7000 with many sitting around the $5000 mark. 9. One of GO’s panel-beaters provided a full written estimate based on the photos of external damage only and his price came to $5850.25. A direct comparison of t...

10. RC v TR Ltd [2021] NZDT 1573 (15 July 2021) [pdf, 185 KB]

    ...Ltd The Tribunal orders: RC is to pay $1,626.00 to TR Ltd by 5 August 2021. Background 1. RC requested a quote from TR Ltd for roof work on his property. TR Ltd provided a quote which was accepted by RC. The quoted price was $3,252.00. RC paid the 50% deposit and TR Ltd carried out the work. RC has no issues with the quality of work. However having seen the amount of time the workers spent on the roof and that scaffolding was not required, RC believe...