Search Results

1. ZG Ltd v KJ Ltd [2020] NZDT 1386 (4 March 2020) [pdf, 188 KB]

   ...invoice refers to the payment as the “Project Engagement Payment”. Therefore, I have determined that the start of the contract was 7 March 2019. 6. I make the following comments: a. A quote is a quote. Where someone gives a quote, it does not matter if the job took 10 hours or 50 hours. In this case the quote given was within a range. It is irrelevant therefore if JIL did or did not spend 15 hours. b. Time was not of the essence. It was only estimated. Therefore, timing is...

2. TE v EX [2022] NZDT 122 (1 September 2022) [pdf, 92 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 claims 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...

3. WD v HT [2023] NZDT 674 (1 November 2023) [pdf, 179 KB]

   ...included. CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 2 of 3 11. The issues are: Did HT misrepresent the caravan? Is WD entitled to damages? Did HT misrepresent the caravan? 12. A misrepresentation is a statement of fact that is untrue. It does not matter if the misrepresentation was innocent or intentional. The sale is not “as-is” if representations have been made by the seller and the seller is accountable if the representations were untrue. 13. The Contract and Commercial Law...

4. BORA Greater Christchurch Regeneration Bill [pdf, 288 KB]

   ...necessary to achieve the purposes of the Bill. 13. We have therefore concluded that the Bill appears to be consistent with the right to freedom of movement and residence affirmed in s 18(1) of the Bill of Rights Act. Section 27(1) – Right to Natural Justice 14. Section 27(1) of the Bill of Rights Act affirms that “Every person has the right to the observance of the principles of natural justice by any tribunal or other public authority which has the power to make a determination i...

5. BD v U Ltd [2022] NZDT 232 (10 November 2022) [pdf, 179 KB]

   ...person cannot see the vehicle, or cannot get to the vehicle quickly. 13. That is the case here. BD could not see her vehicle, or get to it quickly, when she was in the toilet. 14. BD submitted that her need to use the bathroom was not simply a matter of convenience but of urgency. At the hearing BD explained the medical / physiological reasons for this. 15. I acknowledge that this is not an instance of carelessness. 16. However, the wording of the policy does not require an...

6. IG Ltd v IX Ltd [2023] NZDT 390 (29 August 2023) [pdf, 94 KB]

   ...December 2022 (the amount charged is $2,300.43). The applicant’s evidence, which I accept, is that these hireages had nothing to do with IG Ltd. They would have been purely for DX’s purposes. 6) However, the above finding does not resolve the matter. As stated, the Tribunal has to consider whether the applicant placed DX in a position where he could be taken to have been held out to IX Ltd as someone authorised to deal with the respondent, on behalf of IG Ltd. If so, IG Ltd would b...

7. HU Ltd v HO [2024] NZDT 19 (31 January 2024) [pdf, 106 KB]

   ...dispute. CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 2 of 3 The issue [8] The question for me to decide is whether HU Ltd is entitled to recover the sum that it claims from HO. Decision [9] The Disputes Tribunal has jurisdiction to deal with this matter. It is a claim for breach of contract. Section 10(1)(a) of the Disputes Tribunal Act 1988 confers jurisdiction on the Tribunal to hear such claims. [10] I consider that HU Ltd has proved that HO is obliged to pay the claimed sum....

8. NB v TT [2023] NZDT 296 (21 July 2023) [pdf, 86 KB]

   ...absence of a party does not prevent the hearing from proceeding. Section 42 of the Disputes Tribunal Act provides that where the case of any party is not presented to the Tribunal after a reasonable opportunity has been given to that party to do so, the matter may be resolved by the Tribunal on such evidence or information as is before it. 2. According to NB’s evidence at the hearing, NB and TT were friends. TT, the owner of a bar, asked NB to weld some of the chairs for the bar, as...

9. UC v QG RG [2023] NZDT 120 (8 March 2023) [pdf, 202 KB]

   ...terms of the agreement would result in a penalty of $25,000. 2. UC claimed that QG had not paid the $4,000 on confirmation of pregnancy and had sold at least two dogs that were entire and could be used for breeding. 3. QG requested for the matter to be adjourned when it was first called so that she could provide additional evidence. In the adjournment direction I requested that the parties provide a list of any witnesses they wanted to call in the hearing not later than 10 days bef...

10. T Ltd v M Ltd [2022] NZDT 191 (20 September 2022) [pdf, 108 KB]

    ...The director usually does the work himself with staff to assist, however he had some scheduled surgery at the time and sent staff to do the job without him. 5. On 9 August 2021, the Applicant issued an invoice for $8,438.48 after discussing the matter with the Respondent regarding various issues with the job, including excess hours and inexperienced staff being sent to do the job without experienced supervision. 6. The Respondent failed to make any payment, claiming there had been a...