Search Results

1. KI & XI v T Ltd [2024] NZDT 434 (1 May 2024) [pdf, 228 KB]

   ...that the storage unit was secure? 21. A misrepresentation occurs when there is a false or misleading representation of facts. The meaning of any statement made is considered in the context in which it is made, including the nature and subject-matter of the transaction and the respective knowledge of the parties. The meaning of the statement is determined by what a reasonable person would have understood from those words in all the circumstances rather than the meaning intended by the...

2. ML Ltd & PQ v ST & NT [2024] NZDT 534 (1 October 2024) [pdf, 239 KB]

   ...utilise those options and shop elsewhere, then those costs should fall where they lie. 21. With regards to the claim by ML Ltd, based on the return of EF and TU and FG if she hasn’t been spayed, and not knowing the true value of the dogs to keep the matter within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal, coupled with offsetting the amounts due to them by ST and NT with the whelping costs that ML Ltd owe ST and NT, if there would be any available amount up to the limit of the Tribunal’s juri...

3. LCRO 319/2013 RA v ZA (27 June 2017) [pdf, 101 KB]

   ...He relies for support on his experience in a complaint process in which he laid complaint against another practitioner. That Committee adopted a different approach. He considers the process and decision under review evidence a lack of natural justice, bias, predetermination, illogicality and incompetence on the Committee’s part. He believes the Committee side-stepped the professional standards issue and misdirected itself. [5] Based on his suspicion there was covert communica...

4. K Ltd v UD [2024] NZDT 568 (15 July 2024) [pdf, 248 KB]

   ...to UD. K Ltd says the lights were overlooked when UD was invoiced and she was not charged. 1 Which was done on 12 February 2022 2 The claims previously were set down in front of another referee who recused herself part way through hearing the matter. CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 3 of 6 11. UD’s view is that she understood from K Ltd’s salesperson that the one of the lights was complimentary and that she is liable to pay for only one light. XC was present when the cont...

5. B Ltd v Z Ltd [2024] NZDT 621 (11 July 2024) [pdf, 216 KB]

   ...fraudulent. I therefore find that B Ltd was entitled to cancel the contract for misrepresentation. Is the amount claimed proved? 20. Where a contract is cancelled, the Tribunal may order a party to pay any sum it thinks just. It can take into account matters such as the degree to which the contract has been performed, any expenditure incurred in performance of the contract, and any benefit received. 21. Z Ltd says it has incurred set-up costs of $5,690 plus GST ($6,543.50). This...

6. MD & ND v D Ltd [2024] NZDT 626 (19 July 2024) [pdf, 232 KB]

   ...to Day 2 and they accepted. D Ltd did not call HA to counter this evidence from MD and ND and I am able to accept their direct evidence over LE’s hearsay evidence. Whether HA had authority to do this is not the concern of MD and ND, but is a matter between D Ltd and HA. CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 4 of 6 27. On Day 2 the digital records from D Ltd show the first photo was taken at 10.49 before the helicopter left. LE said it ended at 12.58 and this is just over 2 hours – rou...

7. SN v EH [2024] NZDT 763 (13 November 2024) [pdf, 253 KB]

   ...promise as to the future will not be a misrepresentation. The Courts have also said that although the party to a private sale may have been legally justified in remaining completely silent about a fact, by venturing to make a representation upon the matter, such representation must be a full and true statement. It must also not be a partial account that amounts to a ‘half- truth’, which can also be a misrepresentation. 10. A purchaser applicant alleging a misrepresentation from a se...

8. DJ & QW v E Ltd [2024] NZDT 772 (5 December 2024) [pdf, 218 KB]

   ...of any Lot…” “…All statements in the Catalogues …are statements of opinion and are not to be relied upon as statements of representations of fact, and intending purchasers must satisfy themselves by inspection or otherwise as to all the matters…” 11. E Ltd says that in any event, there is not enough evidence based only on the two valuations to say that it is most likely that the Australian valuation is too high. It says that any valuation of jewellery is subjective, and...

9. RI v Hart LCRO 158 / 2011 (13 July 2012) [pdf, 160 KB]

   ...provided any comments on this Application for review forwarded to you under cover of our letter 18 July. It is therefore assumed that you have nothing further to add to the submissions made to the Standards Committee. The LCRO considers that this is a matter which may be determined on the papers and information held to date. You will note that the Applicant has consented to the matter being dealt with on that basis. Please advise if you similarly consent by no later than Thursday, 8 S...

10. Mr-Rasheeds-Submissions-Appendix-I-Appendix-II.pdf [pdf, 334 KB]

    APPENDIX I: TABLE OF LIVE ISSUES N o. Issue Proposed category Why further matters beyond the RC process and report must be considered to complete the inquiry: 1 APPENDIX I: TABLE OF LIVE ISSUES 2 How was the terrorist radicalised and how can this be prevented in the future? Outside the scope of the Inquiry (considered by the RCOI). The RC failed to address this point as it did not have clear directive mandate and appropriate resources to examine the individual�...