Search Results

1. WI & ZI v G Ltd [2024] NZDT 702 (21 August 2024) [pdf, 100 KB]

   ...carried out in a proper and competent manner, that it will be carried out in accordance with the plans and specifications set out in the contract, and that it will be carried out in accordance with all laws and legal requirements. 11. From the information available from both ZI and from G Ltd’s witness, TY, the work in general was not carried in accordance with the plans, and clearly the absence of an ORG means that the job was not completed as per the plans. The fact that much of th...

2. TN v KM [2024] NZDT 696 (29 November 2024) [pdf, 187 KB]

   ...able to be awarded these costs. 19. In total, I find that TN is entitled to be paid $1,597.50 by KM. CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 3 of 4 Referee: S Simmonds Date: 29 November 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 rehe...

3. UM v BD [2024] NZDT 699 (15 November 2024) [pdf, 215 KB]

   ...after they declined to provide a replacement vehicle. I therefore find UM is entitled to a refund of 19 days hireage at $68.09 per day, which equates to $1293.71. Referee: DTR Edwards Date: 15 November 2024 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 reh...

4. E Ltd & W Ltd v TN [2024] NZDT 712 (30 August 2024) [pdf, 103 KB]

   ...foreseeable expenses and so are recoverable. 13. I am satisfied that the amount claimed by W Ltd is the correct amount to be paid by TN, which is $18,119.50. Referee: M Wilson Date: 30 August 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 r...

5. FT v O Ltd [2024] NZDT 693 (20 August 2024) [pdf, 132 KB]

   ...particularly difficult time, most especially for SI. I accept that O Ltd genuinely attempted to assist FT through the transition. This decision is based on the technical point that, although O Ltd may have believed the team share had ended, the necessary formalities were not completed. Referee: J P Smith Date: 20 August 2024 Page 4 of 4 Information for Parties Rehearings You can apply for a rehearing if you believe that something prevented the prope...

6. NT v T Ltd [2024] NZDT 715 (4 November 2024) [pdf, 193 KB]

   ...(Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 715 APPLICANT NT RESPONDENT T Ltd The Tribunal orders: The claim by NT is dismissed. Reasons 1. T Ltd operates a website selling performance parts for cars. In March 2023, NT purchased a TSD coilover kit for a [vehicle] via [online]. NT says the part was incorrectly supplied because when fitted by a professional, his car failed compliance, even after rectification attempts.

7. UD v ST & NT [2024] NZDT 726 (5 November 2024) [pdf, 197 KB]

   ...27. ST and NT have not proven that UD was negligent. 28. Accordingly, UD is not liable for a replacement engine. Is UD entitled to reimbursement of the towing expense? 29. UD incurred an unexpected expense as the result of not being informed of the issues with the vehicle. 30. UD acted in good faith to take care of ST and NT vehicle and get it home safely and at a reasonable expense. 31. UD had the benefit of using ST and NT vehicle during the 3 week stay and fuel, ma...

8. HL & UL v FZ [2024] NZDT 730 (5 December 2024) [pdf, 192 KB]

   ...that repairs were reasonably competitively priced. 10. Accordingly, I find that FZ is liable for the cost of $4,684.81 as she caused the damage to the car. Referee: S Simmonds Date: 5 December 2024 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 r...

9. IN & Ors v GU & J Ltd [2024] NZDT 719 (26 August 2024) [pdf, 127 KB]

   ...voicemail. The claim went ahead without GU. 4. I called J Ltd for the hearing. I spoke to C, who is the manager of J Ltd. He said that since the collision occurred (in August 2023) J Ltd is under new ownership, and he and the current owners have no information about this claim. He said the former owner of J Ltd, E, had been made aware of the claim, but is currently overseas. The hearing went ahead without J Ltd. CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 2 of 4 Did GU, by his negligen...

10. FT v X Ltd [2024] NZDT 708 (20 August 2024) [pdf, 125 KB]

    ...where this involves an element of betterment, e.g., where the damaged item has to be restored to a higher standard due to regulatory changes. 16. That is not the case here. FT could have taken the option of having the retaining wall returned to its former condition at no cost to her. However, had she done so, the expenditure would have been wasted if the reinstated wall later had to be replaced with an engineer-designed wall when the driveway was installed. Instead, she took the sensibl...