Search Results

1. [2021] NZEmpC 218 Bay of Plenty District Health Board v CultureSafe New Zealand Ltd [pdf, 227 KB]

   ...Employment Relations Act 2000 to extend time. The well-known criteria were conveniently summarised by Judge Couch in An Employee v An Employer:5 [9] The fundamental principle which must guide the Court in the exercise of its discretion is the justice of the case. Does the justice of the case require that the extension of time sought be granted? In their detailed submissions about what the interests of justice are in this case, both Mr Beck and Ms French adopted the headings used...

2. IT & NH v UN Ltd [2022] NZDT 163 (25 October 2022) [pdf, 257 KB]

   ...problems, such as that the representation of the baby’s skin was not completely identical to the child’s, and that there were other issues with the look of the feet and hands, though I found it difficult to see the problem in respect of these other matters. 6. On the second day of the hearing, Mr O brought the model back, and said he had consulted widely about a way of improving the skin colour, which he had then implemented. It was apparent that the skin colour was a much better...

3. EB v U Ltd [2023] NZDT 77 (21 February 2023) [pdf, 203 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 77 APPLICANT EB RESPONDENT U Ltd The Tribunal orders: This order replaces the order determining this matter issued on 3 August 2022. Claim: EB’s claim for a declaration of non-liability is dismissed. Counterclaim: EB is to pay U Ltd $2,205.70 within 14 days. Reasons [1] EB engaged U Ltd, represented by TU (director) and...

4. BP v TD [2023] NZDT 259 (25 May 2023) [pdf, 214 KB]

   ...to reserve the right to make a new claim against BP if BP was successful in his claim. I explained that this would not be possible, and that if the counterclaim were withdrawn then my decision in this proceeding would be a final disposition of all matters between the parties in relation to the sale and purchase of the boat. TD agreed to this. For clarity however I have recorded above that the counterclaim has been dismissed, which is because TD agreed in the hearing that he did not wish to...

5. ID v KT [2021] NZDT 1666 (20 October 2021) [pdf, 187 KB]

   ...KT agreed to try to be in a relationship with her again if he could have her car. After that conversation KT left ID’s property in the car. ID has not seen the car since. 3. ID now claims that she is entitled to her car back. 4. This matter was set down for hearing at 9:15am on 30 September 2021. The matter was called at 9:15am and again at 9:30am. ID appeared, but there was no appearance from KT. The hearing went ahead without him. 5. The issues I have to consider are:...

6. [2023] NZREADT 34 - IX v REAA (CAC2102) (8 December 2023) [pdf, 98 KB]

   ...Committee, so that it might be given the opportunity of revisiting its order on publication in light of the new evidence. [15] On 11 October 2023, the Authority filed a memorandum in the Tribunal. Mr McMullan submits that it is in the interests of justice to suppress the licensee’s name. He advises that the appeal is not opposed by the Authority. As for referring the matter back to the Committee, it is submitted that the Committee is functus officio. The Authority’s suggested a...

7. KB v K Ltd & Q Ltd [2024] NZDT 436 (11 June 2024) [pdf, 191 KB]

   ...flew from [City 1] to [City 2] on a K Ltd flight on 27 December 2023. His checked-in bag was not returned to him until after a considerable delay. He claims compensation for goods he lost, and the time and inconvenience involved in dealing with the matter. K Ltd was represented at the hearing by BX. KB has also named Q Ltd, represented by DT, as a respondent. Q Ltd handles baggage in [City 2] on behalf of K Ltd. [2] KB said he had checked his bag in before the flight, having labelled it...

8. LK & NI v JK Ltd [2024] NZDT 636 (5 September 2024) [pdf, 223 KB]

   ...care. 15. Based on the above discussion, it is my view that the application of section 28 of the CGA is relevant, and the Applicants can make a claim pursuant to the CGA. As such, I do not have to consider the general law of negligence in this matter. Did the Respondent provide the service with reasonable skill and care? 16. I find that the Respondent did not provide the services with reasonable skill and care by not having appropriate cyber security measures in place....

9. L Ltd v K Ltd [2024] NZDT 710 (22 August 2024) [pdf, 124 KB]

   ...compensation would put L Ltd in a better position than it was immediately prior to the accident, by providing it with a new asset to replace an old one. This might preclude recovery of the extra amount by L Ltd. However, whether it applies or not would be a matter of negotiation or a matter CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 2 of 4 for a court or tribunal to determine if agreement could not be reached. I also note that the result would likely depend on the impact of other appropriate fa...

10. BX v QD & Ors [2024] NZDT 792 (29 November 2024) [pdf, 237 KB]

    ...has claimed for compensation in the Disputes Tribunal of $30,000. 5. The issues for the Tribunal to determine are as follows: i. Was the property misrepresented by the Trust? ii. Did a term of the Agreement for Sale and Purchase settle the matter and prevent BX from pursuing further costs? iii. If not, is BX entitled to compensation? Was the property misrepresented by the Trust? 6. The sale and purchase of real estate is on a buyer beware basis. The purchaser must therefo...