You can search by selecting a jurisdiction, a keyword (for example a name) or browse by year. Identifying details have been removed.

Some decisions in this section have had minor editorial changes applied, that have no effect on the outcome.

Search results

2559 items matching your search terms

  1. CX & EB v TK [2023] NZDT 342 (31 May 2023) [PDF, 205 KB]

    Contract / Applicants engaged respondent to carry out pre-purchase house inspection / Applicants moved in and noticed audible drips and leaks in house / Applicants obtained quote from roofing company and got another inspection / Respondent says at time he inspected it was structurally sound, no sign of rust or leaking, no water damage on trusses / Applicants seek cost of new roof and associated costs / Held: not established that were visible signs on the exterior of roof / 9 month gap poses evidential issue / Existence of rotten beam in roof space should have been pointed out to applicants but uncertain whether applicants would have taken any further action / Respondent not liable for costs associated with purlin replacement / No remedy available / Claim dismissed.

  2. HI v LX [2023] NZDT 148 (31 May 2023) [PDF, 199 KB]

    Contract / Misrepresentation / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017  / Applicant purchased swing mooring from Respondent / Respondent assured Applicant there is no problem getting insurance for swing moorings / Applicant discovered insurers were reluctant and discovered mooring block is different from listing / Applicant claimed $10,000 compensation / Held: no proven misrepresentation in terms of mooring block size / Applicant suffered a loss and should be awarded compensation for equivalent 3 years additional premium and for detriment of having boat under insured / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $6,100 / Claim partially allowed.

  3. BN v DS [2023] NZDT 144 (31 May 2023) [PDF, 96 KB]

    Contract / Applicant won auction for gym equipment / Applicant paid Respondent $1,150.00 purchase price / Applicant had difficulty collecting equipment and relisted equipment for auction / Applicant advised Respondent that new auction winner would collect equipment / Respondent refused and relisted equipment for auction / Applicant refunded new auction winner / Applicant claimed refund of purchase price / Held: Respondent breached contract by refusing to hand over equipment / Respondent to refund Applicant $1,150.00 purchase price / Claim granted.

  4. PR v Z Ltd [2023] NZDT 353 (29 May 2023) [PDF, 178 KB]

    Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA) / Applicant enrolled in a course with the Respondent / Applicant claims a refund of course fees paid, $7,821.20, as the course had a significant overlap in content with his previously completed diploma / Respondent told Applicant the course content was going to be “vastly different” to his previously completed diploma / Held: Applicant raised his concerns of the content overlap with the Respondent before the contractual refund period had expired / Respondent has breached its obligation of reasonable care and skill under the CGA by describing the paper as “vastly different” to the diploma / Respondent is entitled to 90% of the sum claimed / Claim partially granted.

  5. FH v TI Ltd [2023] NZDT 263 (29 May 2023) [PDF, 172 KB]

    Accommodation / Fair Trading Act 1986 / In June,  Applicant booked accommodation at a motel owned by the Respondent / Accommodation was for a school’s sports team / Applicant paid 50 percent deposit, $2,975.00 / In August, Respondent’s manager sought to cancel booking as other guests were staying there due to a fire in another room / Applicant protested, and a way was found to make it work / Later, a parent delegate visited motel to check on altered bedding arrangements / Afterwards, Applicant decided to cancel booking due to safety concerns regarding presence of emergency housing tenants at the motel / Respondent refused to return deposit /  Applicant claimed $2,975.00 deposit refund / Held: Respondent misled Applicant regarding suitability of accommodation for a school party / Appropriate for Respondent to refund deposit / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $2,975.00 / Claim granted.

  6. HK & QK v JF Ltd [2023] NZDT 334 (26 May 2023) [PDF, 123 KB]

    Consumer law / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicants contracted Respondent for landscaping services, including tiling around new swimming pool / Tiles were laid too close to pool edge, creating significant risk of damage to pool / Applicants claimed $15,607.80 for remedial work / Respondent counterclaimed $3,493.70 for unpaid invoice / Held: Respondent not responsible for unideal aesthetic outcome of tiling, uneven levels out of its control / Respondent was responsible for insufficient gap between tiles and pool fibreglass, did not exercise reasonable care and skill / Remedial work presented similar level of risk as leaving pool as it was / Applicants prepared to take risk as remedial work would also fix aesthetic issues, which Respondent was not responsible for / Unjust for Respondent to be liable for full cost of remedial work / Respondent to contribute 60%, less outstanding invoice / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $5,021.38 / Claim granted in part.

  7. SO v GU [2023] NZDT 326 (26 May 2023) [PDF, 156 KB]

    Contract / Applicant purchased property from Respondent / Subsequently, heat pump found to have a faulty indoor board / Part no longer available / Applicant claimed Respondent breached sale and purchase agreement / Applicant claimed $3,408.00, cost of getting new heat pump installed and filing fee costs / Respondent claimed heat pump was in reasonable working order on settlement date / Held: more likely than not the heat pump was not in reasonable working order / Applicant in breach of sale and purchase agreement / Heat pump was 15 years old  / Respondent order to pay Applicant $150 in compensation / Filing fee not awarded as not provided for in contract / Claim allowed in part.

  8. IS v TM [2023] NZDT 270 (25 May 2023) [PDF, 186 KB]

    Contract / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 / Applicant moved into a flat in November 2020 / Applicant paid $760 bond to head tenant Respondent / Applicant understood flatmates were planning to remain in the property for a while / In early January 2021, Applicant was informed the landlord had given the tenants one month to vacate property due to missed rent payments / Applicant moved out and requested her bond returned, Respondent refused / Applicant claimed $7,720.00 for bond, moving costs, mental health strain, loss of personal property, and other costs / Held: Applicant entitled to full bond / Applicant would have incurred expenses of moving into one flat, but not the additional expenses of moving again so soon / Applicant entitled to cost of moving and into another flat, but not the costs of subsequent move / Tribunal cannot consider the claim for mental health strain / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $3,110.00, bond and moving costs / Claim granted in part.  

  9. SU v F Ltd [2023] NZDT 266 (25 May 2023) [PDF, 108 KB]

    Contract / Applicant parked in Respondent’s carpark, exceeded time limit by 22 minutes / Respondent charged Applicant $80 fine, then added further charges of $120 for late payment and $50 for debt collection / Applicant disputed liability for fines / Held: Applicant breached contract with Respondent by exceeding time limit / $80 fine was enforceable, not disproportionate / Late payment fees were disproportionate, therefore unenforceable / Total sum invoiced and sent to debt collection higher than could be charged, therefore debt collection fees also not recoverable / Claim allowed in part.

  10. BS v MQ [2023] NZDT 269 (25 May 2023) [PDF, 171 KB]

    Contract / Applicant booked two tickets on a fishing charter run by Respondent / Tickets indicated departure time was 9am / Departure time was actually 7am / Morning of the booking, Respondent phoned Applicant to ask whether they going on charter / Applicant was unable to get to departure point promptly so did not go on trip / Respondent later provided a partial refund, retaining $60 per ticket to cover costs /  Applicant claimed $160, for ticket price and filing fee / Held: departure time on ticket was a misprint but the time formed part of terms and conditions of contract / Respondent did not provide the trip as contracted and Applicant received no part of what he paid for / Applicant entitled to a full refund / Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to award costs, including the filing fee, in these circumstances / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $120 / Claim granted.

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

    Contract / Applicant agreed to buy Respondent’s boat / Applicant paid $13,500 deposit and took possession / Applicant unable to pay rest of purchase price within agreed time / Parties agreed to end contract / Applicant returned boat / Written agreement did not specify whether deposit was refundable, or what would happen if sale was not completed / Applicant claimed refund of deposit / Respondent counterclaimed $30,000 for damage and rent, but withdrew counterclaim at hearing / Held: evidence evenly balanced, but Applicant did not successfully establish that parties agreed deposit would be refundable / Not unconscionable for Respondent to retain deposit / Claim and counterclaim dismissed.

  12. N Ltd v SH [2023] NZDT 295 (24 May 2023) [PDF, 126 KB]

    Contract / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 / Applicant contracted by Respondent to provide truck and two movers / Respondent failed to inform Applicant of heavy double door fridge that required more than two people to move / Applicant sent out additional crew and invoiced higher rate, which Respondent refused to pay / Applicant claimed payment of $2,033.00 invoice / Held: Respondent liable for remainder of invoice / Respondent not entitled to compensation from Applicant regarding alleged damage to property / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $1,670.70 / Claim allowed.

  13. O Ltd v TO [2023] NZDT 341 (24 May 2023) [PDF, 169 KB]

    Contract / Respondent was bringing claim with respect to bathroom renovations / Respondent accidentally named applicant as the party in this matter / Applicant’s director is a different person to who renovated the bathroom / Respondent accepted prior to hearing that she named wrong person / Applicants wish to pursue costs for preparation of evidence / Held: s 43 Disputes Tribunals Act 1988 bars award of costs except in limited circumstances that do not apply here / Applicant could just have let respondent know she had named wrong party / Claim dismissed.

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

    Consumer law / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicant purchased a designer jacket for $3,601.78 / Jacket was drycleaned by Respondent / Jacket was returned damaged after drycleaning / Applicant sought cost of jacket / Held: Respondent did not follow jacket lapel instructions / Damaging jacket by washing it and not following the label instructions was foreseeable and direct loss / Respondent ordered to pay $3,686.78, jacket and drycleaning cost / Applicant entitled to jacket but did not want it due to damage / Claim allowed.

  15. LT v OT Ltd [2023] NZDT 356 (23 May 2023) [PDF, 185 KB]

    Contract / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 / Applicant purchased sofa from Respondent / At delivery, sofa was unable to fit through access points to Applicant’s house / Applicant told Respondent she no longer wanted sofa / Applicant claimed $2600 refund of amounts paid for sofa and delivery / Held: Applicant repudiated contract / Respondent entitled to cancel contract and seek damages for Applicant’s repudiation / Terms of sale relevant, provided that Respondent was able to retain deposit plus cancellation fee / Respondent entitled to retain reasonable deposit, delivery fee, and cancellation fee, but not full purchase price / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $2114.10 refund / Claim allowed.

  16. K Ltd v SG [2023] NZDT 211 (23 May 2023) [PDF, 92 KB]

    Contract / Applicant owns interest in claim against Respondent / Respondent was director of a company that had contract to use telephone services / The company was removed from Companies Register / Telephone services were provided for a further three months / Applicant claims costs of services for that three month period against Respondent as they consider her to be personally liable / Held: respondent did not contract in her own name for telephone services, nor was she a guarantor / Contracting party was therefore a company / Claim dismissed.

  17. DC v KN [2023] NZDT 309 (22 May 2023) [PDF, 178 KB]

    Contract / Applicant and her then partner Respondent and another signed a fixed lease for a two bedroom property / Each agreed to pay $230.00 per week for rent / Respondent moved out without notice and stopped paying rent / Applicant and other tenant carried on covering rent in Respondent’s absence / Applicant claimed $4,600.00 for unpaid rent / Held: Respondent breached agreement by not paying rent after he moved out and the other tenants having had to cover the shortfall / Respondent obliged to pay rent to the end of the lease / Not reasonable in the circumstances for Applicant to be required to get another tenant / Respondent ordered to pay $3,220.00, factoring in miscalculation of amount owing by Applicant / Claim allowed.

  18. NJ v UF [2023] NZDT 238 (22 May 2023) [PDF, 247 KB]

    Contract / Misrepresentation / Applicant purchased horse from Respondent / Respondent represented that horse was suitable for a nervous young rider / Horse began to rear soon after delivery / Respondent did not disclose that horse had reared with previous owner / Respondent was aware of this previous behaviour / Held: horse not suitable for a nervous young rider and was not “nice and quiet” as stated in advertisement / Respondent to pay $4000 to Applicant for misrepresentation / Applicant may keep or sell horse as she sees fit  

  19. LZ v I Ltd [2023] NZDT 174 (22 May 2023) [PDF, 178 KB]

    Consumer law / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicant purchased fishing drone from Respondent that included product care replacement option and promotional gift cards / Fishing drone did not function and could not be repaired or replaced / Applicant claimed $5,100 / Held: Applicant entitled to refund of purchase price including product care / Applicant not obligated to return value of gift cards / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $5,100 / Claim allowed.

  20. TX v V Ltd [2023] NZDT 227 (22 May 2023) [PDF, 150 KB]

    Contract / Applicant sold real estate for Respondent / Contract between parties stated Applicant would retain right to commission for listings sold within six months of terminating contract / Applicant claimed commission of $29,612 for four properties sold after terminating contract with Respondent / Respondent disputed Applicant’s entitlement to commission, claimed sales went unconditional more than six months after Applicant left company / Held: evidence Applicant relied on regarding when sales closed unreliable / More likely than not that sales went unconditional more than six months after Applicant left company / Claim dismissed.