Search Results

1. I Ltd v KX [2024] NZDT 204 (21 February 2024) [pdf, 129 KB]

   ...Was KX driving with reasonable care and skill at the time of the collision? c. Did the collision cause or contribute to the damage to the fence? d. If so, what is reasonable costs of repair? Procedure. 5. There have been three hearings of this matter, after the first two hearings I completed adjournment orders. 6. At today’s hearing NI and OP attended for the Applicant and the Applicant’s insurer. MM, K Ltd’s technical insurance assessor gave evidence. KX was rung twice, bu...

2. National Standards Committee v Sarah [2014] NZLCDT 26 [pdf, 45 KB]

   NEW ZEALAND LAWYERS AND CONVEYANCERS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL [2014] NZLCDT 26 LCDT 032/13 IN THE MATTER of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 BETWEEN NATIONAL STANDARDS COMMITTEE Applicant AND TIMOTHY RUSSELL SARAH Practitioner CHAIR Judge D F Clarkson MEMBERS OF TRIBUNAL Mr W Chapman Mr G McKenzie Ms C Rowe Mr W Smith HEARING at the Auckland District Court DATE OF HEARING 15 April 2014 APPEARANCES Mr...

3. TX v HC [2021] NZDT 1427 (28 April 2021) [pdf, 154 KB]

   ...Street respectively. They propose to build a new fence between their properties, and have agreed on the intended materials and dimensions of the fence itself. They disagree as to the location of it, and seek an order from the Disputes Tribunal on that matter. They have complied with the notice requirements of the Fencing Act 1978. [2] Ms X had a survey carried out in February 2021 by Surveying Company Ltd (“SCL”). Its redefinition survey plan shows that the location of a hedge, which...

4. FG Ltd v SB & ID Ltd [2023] NZDT 173 (7 June 2023) [pdf, 120 KB]

   ...July 2022 ST was travelling on [road] when the vehicle owned by his company ([FG Ltd]), hit a large pothole causing damage to the vehicle and making the vehicle undriveable. 2. ST said a wheel rim and two tyres were damaged. 3. ST reported the matter to SB and then to ID Limited which is contracted to maintain and repair this road. 4. The pothole was repaired late the same day. 5. ST claims compensation of $1000 for the damage and associated costs he incurred from both SB a...

5. TE & DJ Ltd v EX [2022] NZDT 122 (1 September 2022) [pdf, 193 KB]

   ...parties nor given evidence as to what instructions the other neighbour gave the contractor. 7. Having heard the evidence I am not satisfied that EX has proven his claim against TE. Whether he wishes to pursue a claim against the contractor is a matter he will need to consider. 8. EX also clams for an injury his wife suffered and exemplary damages. The Tribunal has no power to hear or determine claims for personal injury or exemplary damages. 9. Accordingly, both claims are d...

6. BORA Housing Supply Accords and Special Housing Bill [pdf, 198 KB]

   ...should this prove necessary. 3.We have concluded that the Bill appears to be consistent with the rights and freedoms affirmed in the Bill of Rights Act. In reaching that conclusion, we have considered possible inconsistencies with s 27(1) (natural justice). The Bill 4.The purpose of the Bill is to enhance housing affordability by facilitating an increase in land and housing supply in the regions or districts with housing supply or affordability issues. Key features of the Bill are:...

7. OT v KC & ZX [2023] NZDT 693 (14 December 2023) [pdf, 178 KB]

   ...hide behind his mother’s name and trade in this manner. He has completed 244 trades using his mother’s identity. b. ZX continued to assume his mother’s identity throughout the communication with OT and [postage services]. It wasn’t until the matter was in front of the Tribunal that he informed all parties that his mother was dead and the person doing the trade was him. c. OT received the package in the presence of his grandmother. Both attested that when the package was opened t...

8. HN v CN [2024] NZDT 20 (22 January 2024) [pdf, 203 KB]

   ...be fair and reasonable. 10. In summary, I find CN liable to pay HN for the fees due for the extra quests, totalling $840, plus $100 compensation for additional cleaning and $40 compensation for the towel, being a total of $980.00. 11. This matter was heard today at 11.30 am by teleconference however as CN did not answer calls made to the number provided for her, the hearing proceeded in her absence. Referee: DTR Edwards Date: 22 January 2024 Page 3 of 3...

9. OD v MW & FW [2023] NZDT 398 (8 September 2023) [pdf, 109 KB]

   ...were gifted a $1000.00 voucher for [restaurant] in [suburb]. The voucher was to expire in May 2023. OD says they tried to book using the voucher but received no reply to their emails. He noted that [restaurant] did not take bookings by phone as a matter of policy and their online booking system did not accommodate gift vouchers because it required a non-refundable deposit to be paid. The restaurant closed in June 2023. 2. In February 2023 OD requested a refund in lieu of use of the...

10. NT v D Ltd [2023] NZDT 299 (24 May 2023) [pdf, 186 KB]

    ...washing it (by not following the label instructions) would be both a foreseeable and direct loss. 18. Accordingly, NT is entitled to the amount she paid for the jacket (NZ$3,601.78) plus the $85.00 she paid. That amount is $3,686.78. Other matters 19. NT does not want the jacket because of the damage. In any event as given my order against D Ltd, D Ltd would be entitled to the jacket. In this regard I refer to my order at paragraph 1. Referee: Ms Gayatri Jaduram Date:...