Search Results

1. KK v OW Ltd [2022] NZDT 179 (6 October 2022) [pdf, 128 KB]

   ...‘equine specialist’ as this is a specific qualification. 10. While there was scope for some confusion, I find that the advertisement was not misleading and did not misrepresent the services provided by UW Ltd. There is no evidence that the information about either member of the team is incorrect. The accompanying photographs is of a horse with Dr S beside it. The horse is the dominant feature. The advertisement does not name the person in the photograph as being either membe...

2. NE & SE v JI [2023] NZDT 661 (31 October 2023) [pdf, 260 KB]

   ...vendor’s plumber must have noticed that the roofing paper was severely degraded on either side of the repair site and must have been aware there were wider issues with the roof. They believe the plumber and vendor had a duty to disclose this information, but turned a blind eye, and that the plumber’s work was negligent. The report from the contractor who replaced CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 3 of 4 the roof says there was no ‘change of pitch’ flashing and the roof was “no...

3. DQ & FD v BS [2021] NZDT 1655 (2 November 2021) [pdf, 209 KB]

   ...in the section but none of them apply to the filing fee in this case. I am therefore unable to order that the Applicants pay the Respondents’ costs. Referee: M Wilson Date: 2 November 2021 Page 4 of 4 Information for Parties Rehearings You can apply for a rehearing if you believe that something prevented the proper decision from being made: for example, the relevant information was not available at the time. If you wish to apply for a reh

4. KD v LT [2023] NZDT 317 (9 August 2023) [pdf, 93 KB]

   ...work, rather than proceeding to have repairs done without first contacting him. He said that some weeks had passed between the date he sold the unit and when he had first learned of KD’s concerns, and he had offered a refund as soon as he had been informed of the problems with the unit. The issue [6] I must decide whether the fridge-freezer was accurately described by LT as “good working” and, if it was not, what reasonable compensation LT must pay. The law CI0301_CIV_DCD...

5. N Ltd v BS & TS [2023] NZDT 164 (9 May 2023) [pdf, 183 KB]

   ...consumer’s right of redress is to refuse to pay more than a reasonable price. Was the price fixed by contract? 5. There was no written contract between the parties. N Ltd did not give a quote or estimate for the work, and there was no agreed formula for determining the price. Although N Ltd has done other work for BS and TS’ business, there was no course of dealing between the parties to determine the cost of this particular project. https://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/pub...

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

   ...[towing company] of $644.00 was a reasonably foreseeable consequential loss; and f. In the absence of evidence to the contrary I preferred the insurer’s evidence that 7 days storage was not unreasonable in the circumstances for an assessment to be performed, and I accept that the sum claimed is supported by the invoice from [towing company]. 11. So, I order BT is to pay X Ltd the total sum of $13,614.39 on or before Monday 18 March 2024. Referee: G.M. Taylor Date: 26 Febru...

7. KI v X Ltd [2023] NZDT 584 (20 November 2023) [pdf, 214 KB]

   ...lower of the two quotes to be fair and reasonable compensation for costs to be incurred to remedy the failed wall and order X Ltd pay KI the sum of $29,953.29. Referee: K. Edwards Date: 20 November 2023 Page 3 of 3 Information for Parties Rehearings You can apply for a rehearing if you believe that something prevented the proper decision from being made: for example, the relevant information was not available at the time. If you wish to apply for a...

8. QN & Ors v KN [2024] NZDT 29 (28 February 2024) [pdf, 148 KB]

   ...to the car was repaired at no cost to them, as that cost was paid for by QN. 30. KN is to pay to QN the sum of $3,223.99 on or before 21 March 2024. Referee: P Byrne Date: 28 February 2024 Page 4 of 4 Information for Parties Rehearings You can apply for a rehearing if you believe that something prevented the proper decision from being made: for example, the relevant information was not available at the time. If you wish to apply for a reh...

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

   ...and had a wheel alignment, but passengers still reported that the car was swaying, particularly noticeable in the back seat. 4. On 26 July, NN took it for a WOF which it failed with a rear cross member damaged by control arm mounts. 5. NN informed US and asked for his assistance to have this fixed. US declined and NN had repairs carried out a cost of $1964.75. NN has not included a number of costs including her travel to get the cheapest repair. 6. NN claims this sum from US on...

10. [2014] NZEmpC 159 Franix Construction Ltd v Tozer [pdf, 146 KB]

    ...representatives take notes during investigation meetings but none was adduced at this hearing. An Authority Member may also take his or her own notes of the evidence and although such documents may be relevant in judicial review proceedings, they do not form part of the very limited record from the Authority’s investigation on a challenge such as this. Counsel for one of the parties was also that party’s representative in the Authority but was not permitted to give evidence fr...