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

2831 items matching your search terms

  1. U Ltd v J Ltd [2024] NZDT 762 (11 December 2024) [PDF, 121 KB]

    Insurance law / Contract / Applicant owned residential property and appointed a property management company to look after it / Property manager did not notice issues during tenancy / Property damage and theft of items was discovered after tenants vacated / Applicant considered itself indemnified by Respondent under insurance policy which included "deliberate damage" by tenants / Applicant considered property manager's work in arranging repairs were "professional fees" and so covered by policy / Applicant claimed $10,750 for $6050 excess charged by Respondent and also for the "professional fees" / Held: entitlement under insurance policy based on when each event covered by policy occurred not the date damage discovered / Respondent entitled to apply excess to each item of damage arising from different sources or causes / Work done by property manager in organising repairs and representing Applicant not covered by "professional fees" / Claim dismissed.

  2. ZP v EX [2024] NZDT 858 (10 December 2024) [PDF, 183 KB]

    Contract / Misrepresentation / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 / Applicant purchased horse from Respondent / Horse diagnosed with severe kissing spine and was euthanised / Applicant claimed $19,701.77 purchase price and veterinarian costs and half cost of euthanising horse / Held: Respondent misrepresented horse's condition to Applicant / Respondent advised Applicant that the horse never bucked or reared and had never been lame or had any soundness issues / Horse identified to be lame / Misrepresentation induced Applicant to purchase horse / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $19,701.77 / Claim allowed.

  3. IM v KL & B Ltd [2024] NZDT 867 (10 December 2024) [PDF, 154 KB]

    Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Building Act 2004 / Fair Trading Act 1986 / Applicant contracted Respondent to build carport pergola / Applicant said carport was not built with reasonable care and skill and was not fit for purpose / Applicant claimed $10,000 reimbursement / Respondent counter-claimed $7,000 for additional work and mental distress / Held: Respondent installed pergola without building consent / Respondent's work was a substantial breach and Applicant was entitled to cancel contract / Tribunal cannot make an order against First Respondent personally under its jurisdiction in tort / First Respondent engaged in misleading or deceptive conduct causing loss to Applicant / Applicant entitled to refund less money owed to Respondent / Respondents ordered to pay Applicant $9,500 / Claim allowed.

  4. DM v H Ltd [2024] NZDT 872 (10 December 2024) [PDF, 149 KB]

    Property / Fencing Act 1978 / Applicant's property adjacent to property being developed by Respondent / Applicant and Respondent disputed  fencing surrounding properties / Picket fence had been removed and new timber close-boarded fence extended full length of Applicant's side boundary / Applicant claimed for fence replacement costs / Held: replacement timber fence was on the boundary / Applicant's lack of objection did not equate to consenting to new fence / Previous fence not an adequate boundary fence / Respondent not liable to remove timber-boarded fence on side boundary between parties / No general compensation relating to quiet enjoyment awarded / Applicant awarded costs related to encroachment of her land and painting / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $2,296.17 / Claim allowed in part.

  5. EE v D Ltd & G Ltd [2024] NZDT 862 (9 December 2024) [PDF, 221 KB]

    Consumer law / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA) / Applicant purchased car from Respondent which was manufactured by 2nd Respondent / Applicant experienced issues with sudden power loss / Applicant took car to be checked by Respondent on 4 occasions over 6 year period but no issues identified / Applicant claimed $30,000 and said 2nd Respondent was deliberately hiding defect by turning off Engine Management System (EMS) features or that Respondent had failed to check coolant levels during service / Held: Car was likely of acceptable quality when Respondent sold it and Respondent had provided services with reasonable car and skill / Unlikely car had latent defect and no evidence EMS features had been or could be turned off / Applicant had several months of trouble-free driving between each power loss / Respondent unable to replicate power loss issues during checks / Applicant declined options Respondent suggested to further investigate issues / Compensation unavailable as no Respondents…

  6. LG & G Ltd v QN & IM [2024] NZDT 841 (9 December 2024) [PDF, 179 KB]

    Contract / Applicant completed electrical work for Respondents / Respondents delayed in paying invoice and were charged a late payment penalty and interest / Respondent refused to pay further mediation and debt collection costs / Applicant claimed unpaid invoices / Held: dispute had been settled through mediation conference held between parties / Applicant cannot seek further amounts from Respondents / Respondents legitimately paid agreed settlement amount in full and final settlement / Claim dismissed.

  7. ZM v ZT [2024] NZDT 848 (9 December 2024) [PDF, 133 KB]

    Contract / Applicant booked Respondent's accommodation / Upon arrival, Applicant discovered accommodation was not a separate accommodation with its own bathroom / Accommodation shared between Applicant and Respondent / Applicant and Respondent's living relationship deteriorated / Applicant left accommodation after being asked by Respondent / Applicant claimed for bond paid, reimbursement of excess rent, hotel accommodation charge and parcel not received / Held: Respondent obliged to reimburse bond and balance of rent paid / "No refund" term set aside as harsh and unconscionable / Respondent terminated accommodation agreement / No order to reimburse hotel expenses and parcel not received / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $5,709.71 / Claim allowed in part.

  8. QC & U Body Corporate v NS [2024] NZDT 760 (8 December 2024) [PDF, 201 KB]

    Fencing law / Fencing Act 1978 / Parties are neighbours and had obtained interim Fencing Act order for building a boundary fence / Decision finalises the interim order with some amendments where necessary / The parties sought an updated quote from builder to allow variations to fence not included in interim order / Order sets out matters relating to how fence is to be constructed, payment of costs, and the timeline for when parties should complete acts they have been ordered to / Order records discussion at hearing of issues with as-built plans affecting plumbing to assist parties to continue with as-built plans and make corrections to plan where necessary / Order records 2nd Applicant's agreement to use best endeavors to investigate matters relating to plumbing in as-built plans and to lodge corrected plans with local council as soon as practicable.

  9. TC v L Ltd & WC [2024] NZDT 898 (6 December 2024) [PDF, 209 KB]

    Consumer law / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA) / Applicant contacted First Respondent to apply a film to her glass conservatory roof / A representative of First Respondent visited her home and provided a quote on L Ltd letterhead / The work was completed and Applicant paid the full amount / Subsequently, Applicant contacted First Respondent regarding cracked glass panes / First Respondent claimed work was done by Second Respondent, not their employee / Applicant believed she was dealing with First respondent / Applicant claimed a refund of $5,502.75 for cost to replace damaged windows / Held: Second Respondent had apparent authority to act as agents for First Respondent / Under CGA, First Respondent liable as the supplier for the services provided / Applicant entitled to recover the reasonable cost of remedying the failure / First Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $4,379.75 / Claim allowed in part.

  10. AU & M Ltd v KT & X Ltd [2024] NZDT 871 (6 December 2024) [PDF, 112 KB]

    Contract / Misrepresentation / Respondent purchased Applicant's café fit-out and stock / Disputes arose regarding conditions of premises, electrical work, arrears owed by Applicant, and equipment lease under fixed term contract / Applicant declined Respondent's request to terminate contract / Respondent sold café to another company and did not pay remaining invoice / Applicant claimed outstanding contract price payment plus amount payable for lease contract / Held: Applicant did not fail to disclose information / Respondent failed to prove misrepresentation / No breach of contract / No damages available to Respondent / Respondent breached contract by failing to pay outstanding balance / Respondent not liable to pay remainder of four-year fixed term leased equipment / Second Respondent ordered to pay Applicants $10,000 / Respondent's counter-claim dismissed / Claim allowed.

  11. KX v XM & others [2024] NZDT 869 (6 December 2024) [PDF, 166 KB]

    Consumer law / Property / Building Act 2004 / Applicant purchased new-build townhouse from Third Respondent (developer and vendor) / Applicant sent defect list and was informed they were to be remedied / Applicant claimed $25,000 for cost of remedying issues and time spent chasing contractors / Held: Respondents breached implied warranty of reasonable care and skill due to issues contained in defect list / Respondents given adequate opportunity to remedy defects / Tribunal unable to factor future costs / Reasonable costs awarded / Claim dismissed against First and Second Respondents / Third and Fourth Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $16,479.67 / Claim allowed in part.

  12. IL v D Ltd [2024] NZDT 845 (5 December 2024) [PDF, 161 KB]

    Consumer law / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Fair Trading Act 1986 / Applicant engaged Respondent for landscaping services including a patio area with ramp and steps and a retaining wall / Concrete steps on patio were not polished after it was agreed they could be renovated rather than replaced / Retaining wall was smaller than agreed and was not filled in properly / Quote had included new steps and a retaining wall / Applicant claimed for Respondent to complete agreed work or pay $16040 compensation / Held: work was not completed as agreed and not completed with reasonable care and skill / Reasonable that Applicant expected steps to look close to new and retaining wall was much smaller than what area needed / Path constructed by Respondent has poor finish and was uneven in places / Even though work done at lower price than mark, what Respondent delivered it was  worth less than what Applicant paid / Amount claimed by Applicant unreasonable / Applicant entitled to partial refund / Res…

  13. CH v SU [2024] NZDT 868 (5 December 2024) [PDF, 156 KB]

    Negligence / Damages / Insurance / Applicant's vehicle damaged while parked / Applicant found out it was the Respondent through a witness / Respondent admitted to minor collision which was due to her tyre blowing out / Communications continued for a few years after incident / Respondent refused to pay damages and claimed she did not damage the vehicle / Respondent reported Applicant to police for harassment / Applicant claimed $2,532.50 repair costs / Held: Applicant provided sufficient evidence to satisfy burden of proof / Respondent failed to exercise duty of care when her vehicle collided with the Applicant's vehicle / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant's insurer $2,510 / Claim allowed.

  14. EN & SN v H Ltd [2024] NZDT 832 (5 December 2024) [PDF, 113 KB]

    Consumer law / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicants contracted Respondent to grind and resurface their driveway / Applicants claimed resurfaced driveway is cracking, did not have a smooth finish, and edges were not straight / Applicants claimed Respondent liable to pay them $19,000 / Held: driveway overlay not laid with reasonable care and skill by Respondent / Final product of Respondent's work not reasonably fit for purpose / Respondent liable to pay Applicant damages / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $19,000 / Claim allowed.

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

    Consumer law / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Fair Trading Act 1986 / Applicants bought a diamond ring in an auction conducted by Respondent / Ring was listed in the auction catalogue with an estimated price guide of $17,000.00 to $22,000.00 / Catalogue stated that a gemologist valuation was available / Applicants said the ring was worth much less than the valuation / Applicants claimed the Respondent misrepresented the retail value of the ring and misled them / Respondent stated it did not make any representation as to the value of the ring / Applicant sought an order that the Respondent was liable for $15,231.25, amount of purchase price and Respondent fee / Held: not enough evidence to find there was a misrepresentation or misleading conduct by the Respondent / Insufficient evidence there was a breach of the legislation / Claim dismissed.

  16. N Ltd v D Ltd [2024] NZDT 732 (5 December 2024) [PDF, 191 KB]

    Contract / Applicant discussed buying car from Respondent and was shown one he was interested in buying subject to satisfactory test-drive / Applicant test drove vehicle but cancelled deal after not agreeing satisfactory price with Respondent / Respondent refused to refund deposit and Applicant claims $2000 damages to reflect this / Applicant paid deposit believing Respondent would lower price for car and was not told deposit was nonrefundable unless Applicant was unhappy with test drive / Held: Respondent was not required to refund deposit to Applicant / Deposit not generally refundable in a sale of goods as purchaser takes risk of purchaser changing their mind about purchase / Contract for sale became unconditional and binding after Applicant was happy with test drive / Paying deposit confirmed Applicant wished to purchase at listed price and no obligation on Respondent to explain deposit nonrefundable / Deposit was reasonable as less than 5% of purchase price / Applicant had pulled …

  17. HL & UL v FZ [2024] NZDT 730 (5 December 2024) [PDF, 192 KB]

    Tort / Applicant alleged Respondent damaged Applicant's car while it was parked / Applicant and Respondent were colleagues who did not get on well / Applicant viewed security camera footage overlooking car from neighbouring business immediately after discovering damage and saw Respondent walking around car / Respondent said they were walking around car to inspect and feel scratches already on car / Applicant and insurer claim for costs of repairs / Held: Respondent caused damage to Applicant's car as Respondent was only person around car on relevant day, Respondent's behaviour inconsistent with just looking at car, behaviour consistent with damage caused, clearly carrying something more than just items Respondent said in evidence they were carrying / Damage to car repaired for cost of $4684 / Applicant liable to pay full cost / Claim allowed.

  18. XT & TT v BE & LE [2024] NZDT 866 [PDF, 294 KB]

    Conversion / Impounding Act 1955 / Applicant's cows broke through wooden rails and escaped from paddock / Three cows were mistakenly placed on Respondent's land / Respondent failed to locate owners of cows and sent cows to be slaughtered / Applicant invoiced Respondent for compensation covering the value of cows and loss of one year's production of milk solids / Respondent paid in part / Applicant claimed for full repayment / Held: no certainty as to agreement regarding amount to be paid by Respondent / Respondent liable for loss of cows as he failed to check cow's ear tags to identify owner / Contributory negligence not available for an intentional wrong such as conversion / Applicant not entitled to any award for loss of milk solids production / Claim dismissed.

  19. PU v B Ltd [2024] NZDT 815 (4 December 2024) [PDF, 218 KB]

    Consumer law / Applicant joined a gym in October 2022 / Membership fees were $251 per month and were automatically deducted from his account  / In December 2022, Applicant advised a gym staff member in person that he wanted to cancel his membership / Applicant was not advised he was required to do anything further / 16 months later, Applicant noticed fees were still being deducted from his account / Applicant requested a backdated refund / Applicant was advised the membership would be cancelled but they could not provide a refund  / Applicant claimed for refund of fees / Noted that the Respondent took over the business in April 2023 / Held: no evidence to support verbal notice claim / Applicant did not give notice in writing, as required by the contract / Claim notice of cancellation was given not proven / Reasonable to consider failure of the Applicant to ensure his membership was cancelled / Reasonable to consider the Respondent automatically renewed the contract every three months w…

  20. QT & WT v K Ltd [2024] NZT 895 (4 December 2024) [PDF, 181 KB]

    Contract / Building / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Building Act 2004 / Applicants engaged Respondent to build a home with expected completion of 273 days / Actual completion took 798 days / Applicants said delays caused financial loss including accommodation, mortgage interest and storage costs / Applicants claimed breach of contract and statutory guarantees / Respondent said delays due to ‘force majeure’ including material and labour shortages and weather / Held: Respondent did not breach contract and delays reasonable / Contract expressly excluded warranties for start and completion dates / Delays caused by industry-wide shortages of materials and labour and poor weather, so outside Respondent’s control / Delay was reasonable given COVID-19 impacts / Respondent’s minor errors in ordering did not amount to breach of reasonable care and skill / Errors expected in complex projects and did not materially affect overall timeline / Work completed to high standard and accepted by Applican…

  21. NX v KT [2024] NZDT 777 (3 December 2024) [PDF, 182 KB]

    Consumer law / Contract / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 / Applicant purchased bag online from the Respondent which was advertised as being a designer / Applicant claimed the Respondent misrepresented the bag in the advertisement / Applicant claimed $1,515.00 / Held: bag was certified as a fake / Statement that the bag was bought from a designed store was false / Applicant was induced to buy the bag based on the representation that it was from a designer store / Applicant would not have purchased the bag if she had known it was a not a genuine designer bag / Respondent ordered to pay $1,186.00 / Claim allowed.

  22. BX v QD & Ors [2024] NZDT 792 (29 November 2024) [PDF, 237 KB]

    Contract / Applicant purchased a property from Respondents / Sale and purchase agreement included special clause about a pre-existing weather tightness issue with deck / Applicant had property viewed by waterproofer, who recommended urgent work, estimated to cost $41,860 / Applicant negotiated $20,930 reduction in purchase price / Remedial work commenced after settlement / Problem was more extensive than originally thought / Remedial works exceeded $80,000 / Applicant claimed Respondents concealed true extent of issue and misled her / Applicant claimed $30,000 compensation for concealed defects and additional remedial costs / Held: sale and purchase of property is on a buyer beware basis / However, vendor cannot misrepresent property by concealing defects / No proof Respondents deliberately concealed defects / Sale and purchase agreement placed responsibility on Applicant to ensure satisfaction with own investigations, stated purchaser would have no claim against the vendor for deck re…

  23. QQ & TO v FN [2024] NZDT 697 (29 November 2024) [PDF, 198 KB]

    Consumer law / Contract / Misrepresentation / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 / Applicants purchased a bracelet online / Applicants alleged the bracelet was misrepresented in the advertisement/ Applicants wanted to return the bracelet and receive a refund / Held:  it is for the potential buyer to fully acquaint themselves with the detail of the advertisement and what they are buying / Prudent person does not rely on only one statement in an advertisement / Advertisement did not misrepresent the bracelet / Claim dismissed.

  24. TN v KM [2024] NZDT 696 (29 November 2024) [PDF, 187 KB]

    Negligence / Property / Respondent lived as a boarder in the Applicant’s house / Respondent was required to move out after damage by carpet moths was found in his room / Applicant sought recovery of costs associated with the infestation / Held:  evidence indicated that the carpet moth damage was the result of the Respondent’s lack of care / Respondent failed to keep his room in a condition that prevented or limited the moths’ growth / Reasonable boarder would have noticed the carpet damage and the moths and would have brought that to the Applicant’s attention / Evidence indicated that the carpet was beyond repair / Costs cannot be awarded for printing photos for the Applicant’s claim / Respondent ordered to pay $1,597.50 for carpet damage and associated costs / Claim allowed in part.

  25. KB v TG [2024] NZDT 800 (28 November 2024) [PDF, 101 KB]

    Negligence / Traffic law / Applicant had stopped to turn right with Respondent driving towards Applicant in opposite lane / Head-on collision occurred and Applicant and witness said Respondent had veered into Applicant's lane / Applicant claimed $9075.51 for written off car and towing costs / Respondent counterclaimed for $17955 for repairs and towing costs / Held: more likely than not that Applicant remained in own lane and collision was caused by Respondent / Witness said Respondent's vehicle was coming towards Applicant's vehicle despite sufficient room in Respondent's own lane / Respondent had duty to not drive in way that causes damage to other vehicles or property / Respondent breached duty by causing damage to Applicant's car and was liable for reasonable costs of returning Applicant to position they would have been in if breach did not occur / Costs claimed were reasonable / Respondent to pay Applicant’s insurer $9075.51 / Claim allowed and counterclaim dismissed.