Disputes Tribunal of New Zealand

Contract / Building / Local Government Act 2002 / Applicant entered real estate sale and purchase agreement with Respondent / Agreement conditional upon title and the Applicant entered into an unconditional building contract with Respondent / Applicant received invoice from Council regarding Development Contribution / Applicant claimed Respondent liable for invoice / Held: Respondent liable to pay for Development Contribution / Intention of the parties for Respondent to provide Applicant with a fixed price contract / Delays put forward by Respondent reasonable / Compensation claim for delays dismissed / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $19,355.88 / Claim allowed.

Contract / Respondent 2 purchased a male French bulldog from Applicant 1 / Respondents agreed to rehouse a female French bulldog into their home / From this arrangement, the dog began breeding, increasing the number of dogs that eventually ended up in the Respondents’ home / Subsequently, the relationship between the parties soured, and Applicant 1 endeavoured to cancel the agreement / Applicant 1 sought the return of the dogs and or monetary compensation of $30,000.00 / The Respondents sought an order declaring the dogs as theirs and counterclaimed $26,445.00 for unpaid services and compensation / Held: Respondents breached the contract by retaining the litter of puppies / Applicant 1 breached the contract by failing to pay the Respondents for whelping services / Respondents must return the puppies to Applicant 1 / Ownership of the female dog is to be transferred to the Respondents / Applicant 1 must  pay the Respondents $750.00 / Claim and counterclaim partially allowed.

Disputes-Tribunal-Advertisement-Nelson.pdf

Contract / Applicant signed contract to purchase property from Respondents for $375,000 / There were unconsented works and potential issue with wastewater system / $10,000 taken off purchase price to rectify issues / Contract became unconditional / Applicant claims compensation for replacing sewage system / Held: Applicant reasonably knew there was a potential issue in wastewater system / Respondent’s have not breached vendor warrantee / Respondent’s did not misrepresent property’s single pipe / Respondent’s have not breached contract / Claim dismissed.

Contract / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 / Applicant entered into a contract to purchase a vehicle for $18,000.00 from Respondent / 14 days later the car stopped working / Applicant took the car to the mechanics and was told that it was likely the car had been damaged in a flood / Applicant claimed $9500.00 from the Respondent on grounds that the vehicle was misrepresented to her / Respondent denied any knowledge of the vehicle being involved in a flood / Held: both parties provided conflicting accounts of events / No objective evidence provided / Applicant could not prove they were induced into purchasing the car due to misrepresentations by Respondent / Claim dismissed.

Consumer law / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicant purchased a puppy from Respondent for $2,500.00 / Puppy became ill, and was put down by her vet, within two weeks of purchase / Applicant sought a refund of purchase price plus $805.00 vet and other costs / Respondent stated there was insufficient proof that the puppy had a pre-existing condition, or that it could not have been nursed back to health / Held: breed of puppy was small and sensitive / Respondent supplied Applicant with material about particular health risks to the puppy / Not possible to make a finding that the puppy’s death was caused by a defect / Respondent had offered a refund when the Applicant had first advised that the vet had confirmed the puppy had a defect / However, Respondent had retracted that offer once the vet report was viewed, as it was then understood that no tests had confirmed a defect / In the circumstances, Respondent could not be held to the refund offer / Claim dismissed.

Negligence /Applicant cyclist and Respondent motorcyclist collided in a road accident / Applicant provided CCTV footage that showed he entered into an intersection controlled by lights / Applicant was cycling slowly and was positioned at the centre of the intersection /  After two cars passed, Applicant started turning right / Respondent was driving his motorcycle through the intersection and said he was aware of the Applicant /  Respondent overtook Applicant just as Applicant was turning right, and both riders collided / Applicant claimed for cost of his replacement bike, helmet and bike carrier from his insurer / Applicant now claimed for his insurer to be compensated for the loss it incurred / Held: Respondent breached his duty of care by overtaking in an intersection without ensuring it was safe to do so / Applicant’s insurer entitled to be compensated for all reasonably foreseeable loss / Total foreseeable loss was $1,049.50 / Applicant’s insurer shown that it was entitled to be c…

Rehearing / Application for rehearing / Applicant claimed terms and conditions were only disclosed by Respondent to the court for previous hearing / Applicant also submitted that he wanted to claim against Respondent as she did not provide him with information which deprived him of a potential claim / Held: Tribunal found terms and conditions were discussed in some detail during the hearing / Applicant attempting to claim against same entity, in relation to the same facts, that were previously discussed / Application for rehearing declined / Claim dismissed.

Contract law / Applicant entered into an agreement to purchase a section from Respondent / Section did not have a house as it had burnt down, and the debris had been removed / All that remained was a garage with an attached carport / Section was overgrown with vegetation and some rubbish / Agreement between the parties included a term that the vendor would remove any rubbish before settlement / Applicant claimed that on settlement Respondent had left some rubbish on the section that he had to disposed of / Applicant claimed to be compensated for the dump fees and related costs / Held: unable to establish that the remaining rubbish was part of what the Respondent agreed to remove / Photographic evidence included photo of Applicant’s trailer with branches still with green foliage / Consistent with the Applicant having cut the vegetation, but claiming it was rubbish left by Respondent / Applicant was not given permission to enter onto the land or to cut the vegetation, or remove the carpo…

Contract / Quasi-Contract / Applicant claimed it was contracted by the Respondent to supply staff Christmas hampers / Terms of these arrangements were agreed over a series of emails, rather than a formal, signed contract / Applicant received an email from the Respondent in September 2023 confirming the 2023 hamper project was proceeding / Applicant relied on that confirmation to order goods to ensure availability for late November and December / Applicant claimed it was therefore blindsided by a November 2023 email from the Respondent advising gift hampers would not proceed / Applicant sought $28,923.72 in losses for goods it ordered in reliance on the Respondent’s email / Respondent denied liability contending no contract was made and it was therefore not responsible for loss / Held: insufficient evidence to prove elements of a contract or quasi-contract were present between the parties for compensation to be awarded / Claim dismissed.

Contract / Property Law Act 2007 / Applicant paid Respondent $20,000.00 / Applicant sought refund of payment / Respondent claimed money was a deposit on a house Respondent was going to sell to Applicant / Respondent claimed he had to sell house to another party for less because Applicant did not go through with purchase / Respondent counterclaimed $30,000.00 for loss / Held: parties did not have written agreement for sale / Even if there was an enforceable verbal contract, no evidence that a condition of verbal contract was that Applicant’s $20,000.00 was non-revokable or refundable if Applicant decided not to proceed  / Respondent would be unjustly enriched if he were to keep Applicant’s $20,000.00 / Applicant entitled to be paid back $20,000.00 as it was not a gift and not part of an enforceable term of a contract / Respondent not entitled to any other sum representing loss made by not selling to Applicant / Claim allowed / Counterclaim dismissed.

Contract / Consumers Guarantees Act 1993 / Respondent operates business leasing out shipping containers as storage containers / Applicant stored belongings in leased storage container / When decanted Applicant’s belongings were mouldy / Applicant claims refund / Held: services must be fit for its intended purpose / Applicant unable to prove Respondent breached guarantee that container was not fit for purpose / No evidence provided for damage and costs / Claim dismissed.

Consumer law / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicant purchased her daughter’s school uniform from the Respondent / Applicant purchased a size 12 skirt but later discovered it did not fit / Applicant returned the skirt to Respondent, swapped it for a size 14 and purchased a second size 14 skirt / Applicant laundered skirts / When school started Applicant found that the skirts were too large / Applicant had one of the skirts altered so that her daughter could wear it to school / Applicant wished to return both skirts / Respondent said it would it accept the skirt that had been laundered but refused to take the altered skirt / Applicant claimed $500.00 for a refund on two skirts and compensation for inconvenience and loss of use / Held: insufficient evidence that skirts were not within a correct size range for a kids size 14 school uniform skirt / No  proven breach of guarantee / No evidence that the skirt was otherwise faulty / Claim dismissed.