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

436 items matching your search terms

  1. BD v ED [2020] NZDT 1383 (17 December 2020) [PDF, 180 KB]

    Contract / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 / Applicant purchased a power meter from Respondent on a website / Applicant stated advertisement claimed power meter was in an excellent condition / Applicant claimed the power meter readings were inaccurate / Website rules allowed three-day return period / Applicant contacted Respondent nine days after he received power meter / Applicant alleged Respondent misrepresented the condition of the power meter and had refused to refund his money / Whether Respondent made any misrepresentations which induced the Applicant to enter the contract / Whether Respondent breached terms and conditions implied in the contract / Whether Applicant entitled to return power meter and have his money returned / Held: no independent evidence to support allegation that the meter readings were well below what was advertised / Applicant did not prove there was a misrepresentation / Website rules were clear and provided for a three-day return period / Too many var...

  2. TO Ltd v TX [2020] NZDT 1360 (11 December 2020) [PDF, 255 KB]

    Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Variation of contract / Reasonable price / Respondent engaged Applicant to provide landscaping services at his home / Applicant provided Respondent a written scope of works priced as a “provisional estimate” / A variation order was issued to reflect a change in materials for a path from concrete to stone / During project disputes arose over quality of work and amounts being invoiced / Applicant claims unpaid invoices of $18,306.22 / Respondent counter-claims $30,000 representing sums over-paid and remedial costs / Held: no meeting of the minds with respect to the variation of the total price for the stone path / Applicant’s variation order was not clear or consistent with other comparable pricing for paving with the same product / Respondent claims “remedial” work not carried out by Applicant but was charged in provisional estimate / Held: reduction for remedial work in the overall claim per terms of “reasonable price” under s 31 of the CGA / C...

  3. KN v BT [2020] NZDT 1365 (9 December 2020) [PDF, 101 KB]

    Fencing Act 1978 / Applicant and Respondent own neighbouring properties which share 12m of a 26m length of fence / A 12m length of fence fell in a storm / Applicant and Respondent agreed in principle that the entire length of fence needed replacing / Parties disagreed on building the new fence / Respondent built and paid for a 12m length of fence between the properties / Applicant continued building the remaining length of fencing between the properties / Applicant claims $2836.25 for half of the cost of the fence and removal/temporary repair of old fence / Held: parties did not reach an agreement as to the type and cost of the new fence / Respondent not liable to contribute to costs per s 10(4) of Fencing Act because no notice served before work on new fence began / Claim dismissed

  4. EK v 2E Ltd [2020] NZDT 1384 (2 December 2020) [PDF, 177 KB]

    Consumer law / Fair Trading Act 1986 / Applicant purchased a refurbished phone for $699.99 from Respondent / Applicant’s daughter dropped the phone into a pool / Afterwards problems with the phone / Applicant returned phone to Respondent for repairs / Respondent refused to repair phone without charging / Applicant alleged phone was marketed as being waterproof but was not / Applicant claimed original cost of the phone / Whether Respondent engaged in misleading and deceptive conduct / If so, whether amount claimed was reasonable / Held: Respondent’s website did not state that refurbished phones are not as durable nor that the warranty did not cover water damage / Respondent engaged in misleading and deceptive conduct / Test was how long a reasonable person would expect a refurbished phone to last / Expectation that EK’s phone would last another 26 months / Calculated that Applicant’s phone had 72 percent of its life left / Claim allowed in part / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $503...

  5. FT Ltd v D Ltd [2020] NZDT 1418 (27 November 2020) [PDF, 321 KB]

    Contract / Applicant provided payroll software as a service / Applicant and Respondent entered a Software as a Service Agreement contract / Implementation of payroll software was deferred from agreed timeframe / Software never reached a stage where it was ready for release / Respondent sought to cancel the contract / Applicant did not accept cancellation and sought payment under the contract / Respondent sought reimbursement for its effort and cost in trying to implement the system / Applicant claimed payments due the contract / Respondent counterclaimed for cost of implementation / Whether there was a material breach of the contract by the Applicant / If so, whether the breach entitled the Respondent to cancel the contract / Whether the Applicant was entitled to the sum claimed / Whether the Respondent was entitled to the sum counterclaimed / Held: Failure to deliver the payroll module was a breach of an essential term / Breach of an essential term entitled the Respondent to cancel th...

  6. GT v SGG Ltd & Ors [2017] NZDT 1047 (27 November 2017) [PDF, 83 KB]

    Jurisdiction / applicant purchased trailer to build tiny house / trailer registered in applicant’s name & statement that ownership transferred on payment / seller went into liquidation & trailer & partially built house included in sale of business / whether Tribunal has jurisdiction or whether claim should be transferred to District Court (DC) / whether applicant had title to trailer / whether respondent liquidator liable for conversion / Companies Act 1993, s284 / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 / Held: claim based on property ownership not debt so Tribunal has jurisdiction / Tribunal regularly deals with interpretation of contracts so no need to transfer to DC / trailer in a deliverable state / applicant had title to trailer / ownership transferred on payment & attaching plates signified intention to transfer / respondent liable for conversion / applicant deliberately excluded from possession by respondent / claim allowed / respondent ordered to pay $12,737.05 to applicant.

  7. BI v SQ Incorporated [2020] NZDT 1366 (26 November 2020) [PDF, 210 KB]

    Negligence / Applicant lives adjacent to Respondent / A golf ball travelled from SQ’s property and smashed the front windscreen of Applicant’s car / Respondent's insurance covered windscreen repair itself / Applicant claims additional costs that were necessary for the windscreen to be replaced / Held: the rust was a consequential loss with betterment / Respondent liable to pay a portion of repair costs / Held: low portion of repair costs consequential to Respondent’s negligence / Claim allowed / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $100

  8. BU v BH [2020] NZDT 1400 (20 November 2020) [PDF, 176 KB]

    Contract / Misrepresentation / Applicant purchased a car from Respondent in a private sale / Car developed problems / Mechanic determined would cost more to fix than the car was worth / Applicant asked for money back from Respondent / Respondent refused / Applicant claim was for refund of $3,500.00 or for repair costs / Whether the Respondent made a untrue statement about the car / If so whether the untrue statement induced the Applicant to buy the car / If so, what was the costs of repair / Held: unable to find that the Respondent made untrue statements / Claim in misrepresentation fails / Claim dismissed

  9. JC v GCQ Inc [2020] NZDT 1318 (20 November 2020) [PDF, 197 KB]

    Contract / Tenancy law / Respondent leased a commercial premise from Applicant / during Level 4 COVID-19 lockdown, Respondent had limited access to the premise, however Respondent’s employees were able to do some work from home / Applicant claims $7,363.70 for balance of rental, penalty interest and legal costs / Held: Arbitration clause in lease does not limit Disputes Tribunal’s ability to hear claim / Respondent’s employees could work from home so a 20% reduction of rent during the Level 4 lockdown was fair / Recovery of legal costs prevented by cl 6.1 of ADLS lease / Claim allowed / Respondent order to pay Applicant $2,129.43

  10. NH v RA Trustees Ltd [2020] NZDT 1373 (11 November 2020) [PDF, 106 KB]

    Fencing Act 1978 / Applicant approached Respondent regarding replacement of fence between properties / Respondent proposed replacement of parts of fence / Parties could not come to an agreement / Applicant sent quote from fencing contractor on 1 February 2020 / Applicant sent formal fencing notice on 21 February 2020 / Respondent replied wanting to undertake repairs at own costs / Applicant claims half share of fencing quotation / Held: existing fencing not adequate / Quotation provided by Applicant reasonable for length and type of fence / Claim allowed / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $1449.00

  11. FB and QB v HD Ltd [2021] NZDT 1445 (10 November 2020) [PDF, 264 KB]

    Contract / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 / Applicants booked cycle tour through Respondents / Country became restricted due to COVID-19 pandemic / Respondent offered three options: transfer booking, continue tour or cancel and receive 50% refund / Applicant claims contract was frustrated / Applicant claims $14,066.91 for refund plus legal costs / Held: contract was not intended to cover event in question / Held: contract frustrated due to events outside control of both parties / Applicants therefore entitled to refund of money paid for tour / Held: Respondent entitled to retain $9,340 being reasonable overhead and business expenses / Held: claim for legal costs dismissed as not agreed to in contract or fitting in specific circumstances / Outcome: Respondent ordered to refund balance of $4,613.91.

  12. WQ Ltd v ND Ltd [2020] NZDT 1323 (10 November 2020) [PDF, 152 KB]

    Contract / Respondent engaged Applicant as a subcontractor to complete plumbing work / Applicant claims $15,548.84 owed under various unpaid invoices, plus interest / Respondent counter-claims that Applicant overcharged for work done and did not complete work / counter-claim struck out as issue previously determined in the Building Disputes Tribunal / Held: likely that Applicant did not receive the conditions of sub contract / even if Applicant breached contract, no evidence Respondent suffered loss or would have otherwise been entitled to damages / Applicant owed amounts detailed in outstanding invoices / Applicant not entitled to interest / claim allowed, Respondent to pay Applicant $15,548.84

  13. MB v NQ [2020] NZDT 1374 (30 October 2020) [PDF, 195 KB]

    Contract / Respondent engaged employment advocacy firm to act for her / Applicant became Respondent’s advocate for mediation / On morning of mediation Applicant informed Respondent he was no longer working for firm / Following mediation Applicant requested Respondent agree in writing to terms of engagement / Respondent advised Applicant she did not wish him to act for her / Applicant claims $1221.88 for work done regarding mediation / Held: no direct contract formed between Applicant and Respondent at any stage / Applicant did not make explicit to Respondent that new contract was required if he was to continue to act for her / Respondent did not engage Applicant through her conduct allowing him to attend mediation / Held: Respondent not liable for claim / Claim dismissed

  14. UB and DB v ND [2020] NZDT 1391 (29 October 2020) [PDF, 230 KB]

    Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicant hired marquee from Respondent / Applicant claims damages caused by ballooning of marquee, water pooling and compensation for early lowering during a wedding reception / Held: water pooling on the marquee indication marquee had not been erected with reasonable care and skill / Held: Applicant followed instructions of Respondent attempting to lower and adjust marquee poles to fix flat areas where water was pooling / Held: wind speed not a significant factor to problems which arose / Held: Respondent failed to provide marquee hire and installation with reasonable care and skill, Applicant entitled to remedy under the Consumer Guarantees Act / Claim allowed / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $3078.88

  15. SG v H Ltd [2020] NZDT 1327 (29 October 2020) [PDF, 196 KB]

    Contract / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 / Applicant formed company to provide finance for new companies / Applicant occasionally lent own money to company and was typically repaid by the Respondent / Applicant resigned and discovered he was owed payment of $7,025.29 from Respondent / Applicant submitted claim for repayment of the sum / Respondent claims that Applicant signed a confirmation on his resignation that the Respondent does not owe him any money and he has no other claims against Respondent / Held: resignation letter binding contract / Claim dismissed.

  16. NC & CC v FU Ltd [2020] NZDT 1389 (28 October 2020) [PDF, 101 KB]

    Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicants purchased bathroomware from Respondents / After six months the products showed wear / Applicants sent photo to Respondents advising of issue / Respondent claimed issue was due to wear and tear / Applicant claims costs for product refund, retiling and plumbing costs / Held: there is a failure of guarantee of acceptable quality as the goods are not durable / Held: Applicant’s have right to reject the goods and claim a refund and other foreseeable losses resulting from the failure / Claim allowed: Respondent ordered to pay $1694.00 to Applicants.

  17. CW Ltd v KI [2020] NZDT 1359 (21 October 2020) [PDF, 194 KB]

    Contract / Respondent engaged Applicant to print 100 copies of a book / Internal cover page printed as book’s main cover / Respondent paid for 10 copies, returned and refused payment for remaining 90 copies / Applicant claimed $1,148.47, being the unpaid invoice amount plus contractual interest charges / Held: books were printed and supplied in accordance with the contract / books were consistent with the quotation in terms of number of pages and with the final proof the Respondent approved / Respondent liable to pay invoiced amount / Claim allowed, contractual interest not awarded / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $1044.75, Applicant ordered to deliver remaining books to Respondent

  18. NT v HS [2020] NZDT 1312 (21 October 2020) [PDF, 270 KB]

    Consumer Guarantees Act 1983 / Applicant purchased racehorse from Respondent via an online auction / Horse was found to be lame after delivery to Applicant and took time to recover / Although Applicant took a chance purchasing an older racehorse he could reasonably expect that the horse would have feet in rideable condition / Extent of issues with the horse must have related to a pre-existing condition at the time of sale / Applicant claimed refund costs plus remedial costs or, alternatively, remedial costs plus training fees to bring horse back into work / Held: Consumer Guarantees Act 1983 applies to sales by auction / The horse recovered and is of acceptable quality / The applicant was not in trade and the Respondent could not contract out of the Consumer Guarantees Act 1983 therefore it covers the state of lameness on arrival of the horse / Claim allowed / Respondent ordered to pay applicant $742.00.

  19. ET v XS [2020] NZDT 1450 (16 October 2020) [PDF, 99 KB]

    Consumer protection / Misleading or deceptive conduct / Applicant purchased foreign exchange trading software from Respondent, who was acting as agent for US-based company / In April 2020, Applicant put $3408.10 in trading account / Within a month, most money in the account was gone / Applicant withdrew remaining $679.32 / Applicant claims $3000.00 from Respondent, being his losses from trading while using the software / Held, Respondent’s conduct was not misleading or deceptive / Communication between parties occurred in a context where some knowledge of the risks of foreign exchange trading could be presumed, and included disclaimers that such trading is at the customer’s own risk / No evidence the software product was faulty / claim dismissed.

  20. TB v DF Ltd [2020] NZDT 1370 (9 October 2020) [PDF, 227 KB]

    Contract / Breach of contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicant paid $885.54 for two tickets to an Elton John concert / Applicant attended concert / Performer had walking pneumonia so could only play 14 of his 24 playlist / Respondent was promoter of concert / Applicant claimed partial refund of $440.00 for the concert tickets / Whether there was a breach of contract / Whether Applicant was entitled to a remedy / Held: Respondent knew before concert that Elton John was unwell / Concert should have cancelled or postponed / Respondent chose to proceed so had to guarantee that the concert was reasonably fit for purpose and of a reasonable nature and quality / Respondent has breached guarantee and therefore contract / Highly unlikely reasonable person acquainted with Elton John’s condition would have purchased tickets to the concert / Applicant entitled to claimed amount / Respondent ordered to pay $440.00 to Applicant / Claim allowed

  21. IX Group Ltd v UU Ltd [2020] NZDT 1375 (8 October 2020) [PDF, 199 KB]

    Contract / Applicant engaged Second Respondent to provide platform for streaming services / Problems with platform / Applicant claimed for service costs and costs for getting platform operational / Second Respondent counterclaimed for outstanding service charges / Second Respondent contended that the platform was operational and instructions not followed correctly / Whether there was a breach of contract / Whether remedies were available / Held: issues related to slow internet connection and instructions incorrectly followed / No breach of contract by Second Respondent / Applicant breached contract by not making payments / Claim dismissed / Counter-claim granted / Applicant to pay Second Respondent $5,459.63 for outstanding invoices.

  22. UQD Ltd v KN [2020] NZDT 1415 (30 September 2020) [PDF, 225 KB]

    Negligence / Respondent negligently caused damage to applicant’s 1994 Nissan Largo van / Original Disputes Tribunal hearing assessed losses as $5500 for damage to van and $1980 for storage costs / Applicant claims these amounts were insufficient, as they failed to account for modifications to the van, loss of hire income, or costs / Held: Applicant entitled to be restored to the position it was in prior to the collision, including modifications / loss of hire income not reasonably foreseeable / costs related to insurance Ombudsman dismissed / travel costs allowed / claim allowed in part, Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $2172.40