Disputes Tribunal of New Zealand

Contract / Applicant opened credit account with Respondent / Claim related to two invoices with respect to hiring of equipment by a contracting employee of Applicant / Applicant claimed employee did not have authority to hire equipment and incur debt on behalf of Applicant / Authority lay with only one of Applicant’s employees whom the Respondent knew / Respondent brought a counterclaim for disputed invoices and collection costs / Held: Applicant’s contracting employee did not have authority to bind Applicant to invoices in dispute / Applicant not responsible for invoices issued by Respondent / Claim and counterclaim dismissed.

Contract / Gambling Act 2003 / Applicant was invited by Respondent to join a poker club / Club was hosted by Respondent on an online gambling site / Applicant lost $1,824.00 gambling, and paid this sum to Respondent, who paid the winners / Later, Applicant won $11,200.00 but Respondent would not pay the sum as losing gamblers had refused to pay / Applicant sought $11,200.00 from Respondent / Held: Applicant and Respondent were parties to an illegal contract / Not appropriate for a gambler to receive winnings from illegal gambling in the circumstances / Appropriate for Applicant to receive restitution of amount he lost / Respondent may be left out of pocket but appropriate as penalty for promoting and profiting from illegal gambling much greater / Respondent ordered to pay $1,824.00 / Claim allowed.

Maritime law / Applicant seeks orders against the Second Respondents / Held: evidence shows third respondent has not been paid by any party / Second respondent has not paid third respondent the cost of shipping the containers internationally / Because they were not paid, third respondents were legally entitled to exercise a lien over the containers / Applicant entitled to payment of the shipping costs he paid to second respondent as second respondent has not paid those to third respondent / Claim allowed, Second Respondent ordered to pay NZ$11,771.

Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicant contracted Respondent to build dog box / Respondent failed to build dog box using correct colour and measurements / Respondent's second build badly damaged in transit / Applicant alleged Respondent failed to collect the first two boxes and had them destroyed / Respondent alleged no longer liable to build third box / Applicant claimed for remedy / Held: box is not of acceptable quality / Applicant not entitled to remedy / Goods have become property of supplier when Applicant rejected goods and asked for refund / Applicant destroyed Respondent's property / Claim dismissed.

Contract law / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 (CCLA) / Applicant purchased second hand kitchen advertised by Respondent / Applicant paid Respondent $100 deposit / Subsequently, Respondent informed Applicant he had accepted another offer and refunded the deposit / Applicant claims $850 for the cost of kitchen, $45 for Disputes Tribunal fee, $250 for half day of lost income and $550 for her husband’s lost income for a day / Held: evidence shows there was a binding contract of sale for the kitchen / By selling the kitchen to another person, Respondent breached his obligations and repudiated the contract with Applicant / Claim partly allowed, Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $850.

Contract law / Applicant was a commercial real estate broker contracted to Respondent / Applicant worked as local agent to sell property / Applicant discussed property with client / Property did not sell during the sole agency period and listing was opened to other agencies / Property eventually sold to a company whose sole director was son of client / Sale of property brokered by different company / Applicant claimed entitlement to commission on sale under terms of contract / Held: purchaser was not the Applicant's client / Client's son was the effective decision maker and he was introduced to the property by another company / Applicant not entitled to recover commission on the sale / Claim dismissed.

Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicant bought TV from respondent / TV stopped working / Respondent advised that TV could be repaired in about 7 working days once part arrived / Applicant requested replacement TV / Service technician told not to complete repair as TV could be replaced / Applicant wanted TV to watch a sports event / Applicant claims compensation for stress and time spent locating and collecting replacement TV / Held: no failure of guarantee by Respondent / Applicants claimed losses were not reasonably liable to result from any failure / Act not intended to protect against all hassle or inconvenience / Outcome: claim dismissed

Contract / Misrepresentation / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 / Applicant purchased vehicle from Respondent / Vehicle found to have mechanical hard fault causing shuddering and new transmission required / Applicant claimed repair and diagnostic assessment costs $5,474.85 / Held: Applicant persuaded to purchase vehicle on basis of Respondent's statement that shuddering is not an issue  / Applicant entitled to be placed back to the position he would have been in had the representation been true / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $5,474.85 / Claim allowed.

Contract / Applicant applied to rent room in Respondent’s flat / Respondent said Applicant could move in, pending payment of bond / Applicant unable to pay bond on agreed date, Respondent agreed to allow more time, then changed mind and withdrew offer to rent room to Applicant / Applicant claimed loss of $1,100.00 / Respondent counterclaimed $950.00 / Held: no valid and enforceable contract between parties / Terms of agreement still being changed when Respondent withdrew offer, and bond as consideration had not been paid / Claim and counterclaim dismissed.

Contract / Co-Applicant engaged by Respondent to supply and install fibre-glass swimming pool / Applicant contracted to carry out earthworks required for pool installation / Pool installation delayed / Installation price increased / Pool colour not the colour chosen by Respondent / Applicant claimed unpaid balance of invoiced amounts / Held: contract terms and conditions allow Applicant to alter or amend estimate costs therefore Respondent is liable to pay Applicant actual invoiced cost of earthworks variation / Applicant entitled to pay reinstatement work incurred by Respondent / Applicant liable to refund price increase to Respondent / Applicant breached contract by supplying different pool to Respondent / Reduction in cost of pool shell charged an appropriate level of damages / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $6,519.63 / Co-applicant ordered to pay Respondent $18,905.50 / Claim allowed in part / Counter-claim allowed in part.

Negligence / Land Transport Act 1988 / Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004 / Collision between Applicant and Respondent’s vehicles at a roundabout / Dispute over which party was at fault / Applicant and her insurer claimed the cost of car repairs of $6,017.15 / Held: insufficient reason overall to prefer one account over another / Respondent not liable to pay for damage / Both parties bear the costs of their own repairs / Claim dismissed.

Contract / Applicant had house sharing agreement with the Respondent and another couple / Respondent was leaseholder of flat / Applicant paid $285 per week for room and $25 for expenses / Applicant claimed she was overcharged by Respondent for entire duration of her stay / Applicant said fair rent should be $195 per week / Applicant sought refund of estimated overpaid rent / Applicant also claimed when other couple in the apartment vacated they were refunded $108 from expense account but she did not receive anything / Applicant claimed $1188.00, $108 for surplus expenses and $90 per week overpaid rent for 12 weeks / Held: house sharing agreement was binding agreement between Applicant and Respondent / Once Applicant signed agreement she was bound to pay weekly rent and expenses as stipulated / No misrepresentation from Respondent that induced Applicant into the agreement / Not satisfied that there was any amendment to housing sharing agreement reducing Applicant’s rent / No legal power…