Disputes Tribunal of New Zealand

Compensation / Montreal Convention 1999 / Airline liability / Applicant booked tickets from Respondent / Applicant's flight cancelled / Applicant's luggage went missing and two luggages were found with significant water damage / Applicant claimed $25,953 compensation / Held: Applicant entitled to $2,139.54 under Montreal Convention / Montreal Convention has limits to compensation claim / Each Applicant entitled to $640 in compensation for delay / Respondent ordered to pay First Applicant $2,779.54 and Second Applicant $640 / Claim allowed in part.

Contract / Applicant engaged Respondent for building work / Respondent’s work to cost $50,000 / Respondent carried out work, but left site following changes to building plans by Applicant’s architect / Applicant had paid Respondent around $25,000 / Applicant claimed refund of various payments made to Respondent, plus $31,625.40 for cost of ‘remedial work’ by another building company / Held: Applicant provided insufficient evidence regarding two claims for refunds, did not prove loss regarding third / Cost paid to later building company was not to remedy Respondent’s work, but to complete build / Build completed on plans materially different to those Respondent had quoted on / Although Applicant paid more for build than original contract, had not proven loss / Claim dismissed.

Contract / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 / Applicant bought puppies from Respondent / Applicant believed deposit was refundable as per advert / Applicant withdrew purchase, but Respondent refused to refund deposit, claiming advert had error / Applicant claimed $500 for deposit and $45 for tribunal fee / Held: contract included an express term that deposit was refundable, as per advert / Tribunal fee unable to be awarded / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $500 / Claim allowed.

Consumer law / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicant bought umbrella from Respondent / Respondent fixed umbrella when it broke / Applicant sought $199 refund / Held: umbrella was not of acceptable quality / Failure was not of substantial character / Applicant not entitled to reject goods and claim refund / Claim dismissed.

Commercial / Conversion / Applicant and Respondent purchased two puppies for $6,470 / Respondent took possession of both puppies / Respondent owed debt to Applicant / Applicant and Respondent disagree on amount of debt owing / Applicant claimed return of one dog and payment of debt / Held: possession of one puppy passed to Respondent but ownership did not / Applicant entitled to return of one puppy / Total proven debt is $13,785 / Total commission and payment by Respondent $6,550 / Respondent ordered to deliver dog to Applicant's representative / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $7,235 / Claim allowed.

Contract / Applicant engaged Respondent to supply and install new kitchen and laundry / Applicants discovered space for appliances was smaller than measurements on plan / Applicant and Respondent discussed refund but could not agree on appropriate amount / Applicant claimed compensation / Held: 10% of contract price appropriate for damages / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $1700 / Claim allowed in part.

Contract / Applicant claimed they paid Respondent $21,030.00 for cars that Respondent’s brother was to purchase / Applicants claimed Respondent failed to pay his brother and kept money for himself / Held: insufficient evidence Respondent breached contract / There were no receipts for money and no written documents, such as text messages, invoices, email correspondence between parties, that support amounts Applicants claim / Claim dismissed.

Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicant purchased car stereo online for $10.00 / Respondent was stereo importer / After installation stereo found to be faulty / Applicant claimed $375.00 from Respondent / Respondent claimed stereo was type that was only sold to traders / Stereo was third hand when Applicant brought it / Respondent claimed impossible to tell what may have happened to stereo over various installation and removal processes / Held: stereo's low price and being only three months old suggested there could be a fault / Unclear if stereo was defective or had been mishandled / Applicant unable to prove that Respondent was liable / Claim dismissed.

Contract / Applicant contracted Respondent for house removal / Respondent not able to complete move / Applicants had to accept quote from another company at additional cost / Applicants claimed $8,360 for additional costs / Held: contract not concluded until full document was signed / Non-payment of deposit and late return of contract left deal at election of Respondent / Unable to find breach by Respondent that justifies award of sum claimed / Claim dismissed.

Consumer law / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicant contracted Respondent for orthodontic treatment / Respondent advised treatment plan was complete after three years / Result was not as expected / Applicant raised concerns with Respondent, who offered to continue treatment at additional cost, then offered to continue treatment for free / Respondent claimed to have lost faith in Respondent’s services / Applicant sought full refund of $8900 / Held: treatment plan was not suitable for Applicant’s needs, therefore not fit for purpose / Respondent’s failure was not substantial/ Applicant did not give Respondent opportunity to remedy problem / Claim dismissed.

Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicant supplied fabric and other materials to re-upholster Respondent's furniture / Respondent dismayed to discover material ordered was different to what she had wanted and declined to pay / Applicant claimed $5,054.25 payment / Respondent counter-claimed $30,000 / Held: Applicant made a mistake in ordering fabric that Respondent unfortunately did not notice / Applicant's reupholstering work not carried with reasonable care and skill and resulting product not fit for purpose / Respondent not liable to pay Applicant / Applicant must refund Respondent for amount already paid / Applicant ordered to pay Respondent $4,509.73 / Claim dismissed.

Contract / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 / Applicant was member of Respondent sporting club / Respondent passed by-law requiring members provide proof of COVID-19 vaccination for entry / Applicant claimed Respondent either breached or repudiated membership contract  by passing and enforcing by-law / Applicant claimed $4000 damages / Held: contract existed between parties / Respondent’s constitution comprised written contract / Respondent passed by-law in accordance with constitution / Respondent did not breach or repudiate contract / Claim dismissed.

Contract / Applicant entered into contract for employment and advocacy services with Respondent / Applicant claimed $20,000 refund for services and sought declaration of non-liability $4,219.79 for balance of early termination upon cancellation of contract / Held: no breach of contract by Respondent has been established / Paid fees to Respondent are non-refundable / Applicant ordered to pay Respondent $4,219.79 / Claim dismissed.