Tort / Negligence / Respondent reversed car into Applicant’s stationary car / Applicant, through their insurer, claimed $3,467.36 from Respondent / Held: Respondent was responsible for reversing into Applicant’s car without any warning / Applicant did not contribute to collision / Collision caused damage / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $3,467.36 / Claim allowed.
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.
2261 items matching your search terms
-
TH v BC [2024] NZDT 141 (16 April 2024) [PDF, 215 KB] -
BB v NC [2024] NZDT 127 (16 April 2024) [PDF, 204 KB] Contract / Misrepresentation / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 / Applicant purchased house from Respondent / At pre-purchase inspection, Applicant noted water on garage floor / Respondent stated it was caused by a blocked drain which had now been cleared, and that the garage had never flooded previously / After purchase, Applicant discovered flooding in garage and engaged drainlayer to examine site / Drainlayer discovered number of defects in drain installation / Applicant claimed Respondent misrepresented state of the property / Applicant claimed $16,722.14 for repairs, $11,235.64 for plumbing work and two insurance excesses for damage to property totalling $916.28 / Held: Applicant established that drain laying was defective / Respondent’s statements regarding leaking were incorrect / Respondent’s misrepresentations influenced Applicant, induced her to enter contract / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $28,874.06 / Claim allowed.
-
SB v LQ [2024] NZDT 128 (16 April 2024) [PDF, 203 KB] Contract / Misrepresentation / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 (CCLA) / Applicant purchased motorbike from Respondent, who was 16 years old / Bike suffered mechanical issues after being ridden by Applicant for 30 minutes / Applicant claimed Respondent misrepresented bike / Applicant claimed $4,000 towards mechanical repairs / Held: it was for the Applicant to ensure bike was of the quality he wanted to purchase, as it was not sold with a guarantee that it would be reasonably durable or of acceptable quality / Applicant therefore failed to show he was induced to enter into contract because the bike was misrepresented to him / CCLA provides that a contract cannot be enforced against a minor unless the court considers it fair to do so / Claim dismissed.
-
QX v XN Ltd [2024] NZDT 110 (16 April 2024) [PDF, 207 KB] Consumer law / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicant purchased a second hand motorhome / Year after purchase, motorhome required significant repairs / Applicant claimed motorhome was not of acceptable quality / Applicant claimed $19,245.66 from Respondent distributor / Held: insufficient evidence to establish motorhome was not of acceptable quality / Motorhome had not had a full service since it was supplied new to original owner / Reasonable consumer would expect to have motor vehicle serviced regularly / Had vehicle been regularly serviced, defects may have been detected and remedied before major damage caused / Claim dismissed.
-
I Ltd v D Ltd & ors [2024] NZDT 136 (15 April 2024) [PDF, 176 KB] Contract / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 (CCLA) / Applicant sent parcel to its customer / Parcel was scanned into First Respondent’s facility and remained there for some time / Parcel was scanned multiple times until eventually it was scanned no more and was not located in the facility / Applicant filed a loss claim with First Respondent / First Respondent accepted claim with a “pre-approved value 8000” and paid Applicant $2,000.00, in accordance with CCLA liability limitation / Later, First Respondent explained that the “pre-approved value 8000” was a mistake / Applicant claimed parcel was worth $10,000.00 and had been stolen / Applicant’s receipt for item was for $8,709.58 / Held: fate of parcel remains unknown / Applicant’s claim of theft not proven / Contract was at owner’s risk / First Respondent had no liability for loss or damage unless loss or damage was intentional / No evidence of intentional loss / First Respondent not liable for loss / Claim dismissed.
-
BC v KQ & EQ [2024] NZDT 146 (15 April 2024) [PDF, 193 KB] Contract / Applicant sold car to Respondent for $4,900 / Applicant claimed money was not received due to being deposited in account with incorrect suffix / Held: Respondent had not paid for car as agreed / Applicant not entitled to claim funds as Applicant could not prove loss was due to Respondent’s actions alone / Claim dismissed.
-
F Ltd v KI Ltd [2024] NZDT 135 (15 April 2024) [PDF, 152 KB] Contract / Applicant leased premises from Respondent / After issues with roof leaking, parties inserted Special Condition relating to weathertightness into lease / Premises had ongoing leak issues / Respondent had tradesmen attend for repairs, but leaks were unresolved / Applicant stopped paying rent for 10 months before lease ended / Applicant claimed for a declaration of non-liability for rent arrears, damages for loss of profit and damage to stock / Respondent counterclaimed for rent arrears / Held: Special Condition allowed Applicant to suspend rent when notice of leak had been given and not remedied / Requirements for suspension of rent met for total period of 33 weeks / Applicant liable to pay remaining 9 weeks and 4 days unpaid rent / Insufficient evidence for lost profit and damaged stock claims / Applicant ordered to pay Respondent $8,323.74 / Claim allowed in part.
-
TL & UL v Q & QT Limited [2024] NZDT 145 (12 April 2024) [PDF, 167 KB] Contract / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 / Applicants engaged Respondent to design and build shed home for fixed price and paid deposit / Applicants cancelled contract / Applicants claimed sums Respondent retained for margins on sub-contractors work, programme design and draughtsman drawing / Held: Respondent must refund draughtsman fee and margins / Respondent agreed to refund and no evidence of draughtsman work or margins paid / Respondent entitled to charge fee for project design system / Respondent ordered to pay Applicants $18,003 / Claim allowed in part.
-
BL & KL v QT [2024] NZDT 206 (12 April 2024) [PDF, 114 KB] Consumer law / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicants contracted Respondent to paint home for $25,600.00 / Applicants became concerned about quality and time the job was taking / Applicants hired a painter to repaint part of the property for $4,600.00 / Applicants requested Respondent finish repainting gutters and leave property / Parties agreed remaining $5,000.00 owing to contract price would be used for completion and remedial work / Respondent confirmed agreement was settled / Applicants lodged claim with insurer for damage and received a $28,944.31 cash settlement / Applicant’s insurer sought $30,000.00 from Respondent including $400 excess / Held: Applicants and insurer barred from claiming remedial work / Matter had already been settled / Respondent not provided opportunity to complete remedial work / Claim dismissed.
-
BO & UO v KQ & Ors [2024] NZDT 149 (12 April 2024) [PDF, 193 KB] Negligence / Duty of Care / Section 5.9(3) Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004 / Four vehicles involved in nose to tail collision / Respondent driver of fourth vehicle / Applicant claimed $24,236.09 for damages allegedly caused by Respondent / Held: Respondent breached duty of care to not follow so closely that he would be unable to stop / Respondent's actions caused the damage to all four vehicles / Respondent liable to put owners and insurers in position they were in before collision occurred / Amounts claimed by insurers found to be reasonable / Respondent must pay $14,942.97 to Second Respondent's insurer / Respondent must pay $5,500 to Applicant's insurer / Claim allowed.
-
N Ltd v Q Ltd [2024] NZDT 177 (11 April 2024) [PDF, 197 KB] Trespass and Contract law / Third party parked car owned by Applicant on street / Respondent issued breach notice to third party but third party moved countries and did not receive notice / Respondent contacted Applicant for original fine and late fees / Applicant claims they are not liable to pay the amount sough of $500 in relation to late fees and debt collection fees / Held: Applicant has trespassed onto third party’s land / No contract was formed between parties for parking on third party’s land, therefore no agreement to pay late fees or debt collection fees / Claim allowed, Applicant to pay respondent $95 being original breach amount but not liable to pay other amounts being late fees or debt collection fees.
-
BL & CM v KB (aka CK) [2024] NZDT 180 (11 April 2024) [PDF, 176 KB] Contract law / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicant purchased vehicle from Respondent / Vehicle overheated and went limp shortly after purchase / Applicant attempted to contact Respondent but he blocked them online / Applicant sought $9,000 payment refund and to return the vehicle to Respondent / Held: Respondent advertised other vehicles online, therefore CGA applies as he is deemed a supplier in trade to a consumer / Respondent breached CGA by supplying a vehicle not of acceptable quality / Applicant entitled to $9,000 purchase price refund from Respondent / Claim allowed.
-
TD v KD [2024] NZDT 174 (11 April 2024) [PDF, 129 KB] Property / Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) / Respondent moved into small room in Applicant's property before moving into large room / Respondent paid rent of $280.00 per week inconsistently over a period / Applicant claimed $4,790.00 for unpaid rent and $140.00 for music festival ticket / Held: Tribunal had jurisdiction / RTA did not apply to tenancy as Applicant continued to use premises principally as place of residence / Evidence of quasi-contractual agreement that rent of $150.00 per week was to be paid during time in small room / Evidence of agreement to pay rent of $280.00 per week during time in larger room / Respondent not liable to pay rent for entire period claimed / Respondent did not dispute ticket / Respondent ordered to pay $1,910.00 / Claim allowed in part.
-
BS Ltd v UN [2024] NZDT 164 (11 April 2024) [PDF, 166 KB] Contract / Applicant was engaged by Respondent to provide kitset building / Kitset costing around $90,000 was provided / Applicant claimed $8,831.24 outstanding payment under contract / Respondent counterclaimed $30,000, alleging that building frame was defective, causing damage requiring remediation / Held: Applicant delivered building that met its contractual obligations, therefore was entitled to outstanding payment of $8,831.24 / Warping damage arose due to drying of wood in situ, requiring remediation / Applicant was responsible for design, materials and engineering of building under contract, and did not provide Respondent with any warning or guidance related to wet timber, therefore liable for remediation / Cost of repair calculated at $36,526.88 / Respondent entitled to cost of repair minus outstanding payment to Applicant / Applicant ordered to pay Respondent $27,695.64 / Claim and counterclaim allowed.
-
TM v B Ltd [2024] NZDT 142 (11 April 2024) [PDF, 104 KB] Insurance law / Applicant bought a unit in 2016 / Applicant entered into agreement with Respondent for house insurance / Following inquiries by Respondent in 2023, insurance was cancelled as Applicant’s unit was a “stacked” unit / Applicant claimed $9,172.95, refund of premium payments over the years / Held: Respondents took reasonable steps when deciding to provide insurance / Applicant did not prove Respondent should have realised problem earlier / Respondent entitled to cancel policy / Evidence showed Respondent would have honoured policy during insured period / Applicant not entitled to a refund / Claim dismissed.
-
BX & HX v L Ltd [2024] NZDT 125 (10 April 2024) [PDF, 196 KB] Consumer law / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA) / Applicants planned to travel on one of the Respondent’s ferries / Applicants advised evening before travelling that sailing was cancelled due to a serious incident / Respondent provided full refund of ferry fare / Applicants sought damages of $1,651.81 for costs stemming from cancellation of ferry at short notice / Held: damages can be awarded to cover reasonable foreseeable losses resulting from Respondent’s failure to comply with the CGA / Awarded damages of $144.97 for costs of return flights, $553 for car hire, $82.50 for airport carparking, $45 for uber / Costs of food, pharmacy purchase, and $640 for time spent rearranging travel were too remote and not foreseeable losses / Respondent ordered to pay $1,075.47 / Claim allowed in part.
-
TD v MT [2024] NZDT 173 (10 April 2024) [PDF, 225 KB] Contract / Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) / Applicant owned property / Respondent moved into room at property and was to pay rent of $280.00 per week / Respondent paid $280.00 once / Respondent later paid a further $600.00 / Applicant claimed $6,160.00 for unpaid rent / Held: RTA did not apply to agreement between parties / Applicant was owner of property and used property as his principal place of residence, therefore tenancy was outside jurisdiction of the Tenancy Tribunal and claim could be heard by Disputes Tribunal / Parties agreed Respondent would pay $280.00 per week while living at property / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $5,560.00 being the actual amount of unpaid rent / Claim partially allowed.
-
D Ltd v NN & LN [2024] NZDT 154 (10 April 2024) [PDF, 119 KB] Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Respondents engaged Applicant to renovate a bathroom / Respondents had concerns about quality of the work and withheld payment of two final invoices / Applicant claimed $2,034.22 for outstanding invoices / Respondents counterclaimed $6,500.00 for stress, anxiety, and remedying damage / Respondents believed there was failure of reasonable care and skill in work / Held: no evidence there was a failure of reasonable care and skill with most of the work, exception being sealant and towel rail / Applicant contacted Respondent and tried to remedy issues within a reasonable timeframe / Respondent indicated they no longer wished for Applicant to remedy issues / Applicant was therefore unable to claim remedial work cost / Respondent ordered to pay $2,034.22 for outstanding invoices / Claim granted and counterclaim dismissed.
-
TU v EM [2024] NZDT 153 (10 April 2024) [PDF, 103 KB] Contract / Misrepresentation / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 / Applicant purchased second hand baler from Respondent / Respondent stated baler was in good working condition / Applicant took baler to get checked by mechanic who found it needed repairs / Applicant claimed Respondent misrepresented machine which induced him to buy it / Applicant claimed $6,659.79 plus GST / Held: misrepresentation was proven / Applicant suffered additional costs of transporting baler to the mechanic / Applicant entitled to damages / Respondent much pay Applicant $7,388.75, purchase price of baler, transportation costs and GST / Claim granted.
-
QT v B Ltd [2024] NZDT 148 (10 April 2024) [PDF, 142 KB] Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Respondent undertook some earthworks for Applicant / Applicant claimed Respondent did not complete some work and other work not completed at an acceptable standard / Applicant claimed $30,00.00 refund / Held: Applicant not liable to pay for extra plumbing costs / Applicant liable to pay for camera inspection of sewage sleeving / Respondent did not carried out work for storm water and sewer connection with reasonable skill and care / Insufficient evidence that boundary work was defective / Respondent to pay $7,996.25, for failure to work impacting sewer and stormwater connection / Claim allowed in part.
-
IQ & WK v HK [2024] NZDT 134 (10 April 2024) [PDF, 222 KB] Contract / Property Law Act 2007 / Parties purchased house together / Each party owned one third share / Relationship between parties broke down / Respondent convicted of assault and bailed away from house / Respondent stopped contributing to mortgage and outgoings / Parties agreed to sell house / Applicants claimed $10,000 for Respondent’s unpaid contributions / Respondent counterclaimed $16,706.43 for costs relating to property / Held: parties had agreed to equal contributions to property outgoings, and equal shares in proceeds from any sale / Respondent being bailed away from address did not absolve him of responsibility for contributions / Respondent liable for $9,120 mortgage contributions / None of Respondent’s counterclaims successful / Orders made for equal distribution of sale proceeds minus deductions for successful claims / Claim allowed and counterclaim dismissed.
-
DI v C Ltd [2024] NZDT 114 (10 April 2024) [PDF, 232 KB] Contract / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 / Applicant attempted to book accommodation over Christmas period on Respondent’s website / Applicant received pop-up which he understood to mean booking was unsuccessful, so booked elsewhere / Applicant’s credit card was later charged full booking price of $6390 / When contacted, Respondent refused to cancel booking or relist property / Applicant claimed contract never formed, sought $6873.04 refund, interest and filing fee / Held: not proven that booking resulted from system error as claimed by Applicant / Although Respondent not obligated to relist property, relying on this term was harsh in circumstances, contributed to Applicant’s loss / Respondent agreed to refund $299 booking fee and $206 cleaning fee / Further order of $500 justified to acknowledge that Respondent’s refusal to relist property led to unfair and unjust situation for Applicant / Respondent ordered to pay $1005.00 / Claim allowed in part.
-
IV v O Ltd [2024] NZDT 305 (8 April 2024) [PDF, 188 KB] Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 / Applicant engaged Respondent to move house contents / Afterwards, Applicant discovered several items were missing and many items were damaged or broken / Applicant claimed $10,100.00 compensation / Held: more likely than not that the items were damaged or went missing while in Respondent’s care / Parties’ contract for carriage stated all goods were carried and or stored at owner’s risk / Respondent did not intentionally damage or lose Applicant’s goods / Applicant’s claim not proven / Claim dismissed.
-
UH v QT Ltd [2024] NZDT 115 (8 April 2024) [PDF, 205 KB] Trespass / Applicant parked her car in a private car park with signage stating “No Parking Private Property” / Applicant received infringement notice from Respondent and request to pay $95.00 / Applicant disputed charge and paid $2.00 / Respondent increased demanded payment to $245.00 / Respondent advised that Applicant was required to pay $318.00 / Held: Applicant trespassed when he parked in a clearly signposted private carpark / Order for $95 was reasonable / Applicant ordered to pay $93, infringement notice amount minus paid $2 / No contract between parties so no basis to claim late payment fees / Applicant not liable for any other claimed amount by Respondent / Claim allowed in part.
-
ZY v BT [2024] NZDT 144 (8 April 2024) [PDF, 40 KB] Rehearing / Respondent applied for a rehearing because he missed call for original hearing / Held: no procedural unfairness when a party was informed of hearing date and choose not to attend / No miscarriage of justice from not being heard, as Respondent did not present evidence to support his claims / Rehearing not granted / Claim dismissed.