Disputes Tribunal of New Zealand

Negligence / Applicant parked his vehicle on public road below Respondent’ property / Respondent’s 40kg storage box was blown away and landed on Applicant’s vehicle causing damage / Applicant claimed $6,000 in damages / Held: insufficient evidence Respondent had been negligent / Given its weight and previous stability of the box, a reasonable person would not have thought it was possible for the box to be blown off the bank / Event was a freak occurrence rather than a foreseeable risk / No duty of care was breached /  No estoppel arose from parties’ correspondence / Claim dismissed.            

Negligence / Applicant’s vehicle was stationary at traffic lights when Respondent’s vehicle collided with it / Applicant claimed Respondent reversed into his vehicle while Respondent claimed Applicant drove into his vehicle / Applicant claimed $1,346.54 in damages / Held: on balance of probabilities more likely that Respondent either reversed or allowed his car to roll back into Applicant’s vehicle / Respondent failed to take reasonable care while driving and was negligent / Applicant’s repair costs reasonable / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $1,346.54 / Claim allowed.  

Negligence / Head-on collision occurred between Applicant’s car and Respondent’s tractor as they turned a blind corner / Applicant claimed collision was inevitable as Respondent had not taken all necessary steps to ensure safety of other road users while driving his tractor / Applicant said Respondent had negligently positioned tractor forks / Applicant's vehicle was damaged beyond repair in the collision, determined to have pre-accident value of $1,500 / Held: collision caused because neither party was traveling at a speed that allowed them to stop in half the roadway that was visible to them / Not accepted that Respondent had a higher duty of care to avoid an accident when driving a tractor / Applicant and Respondent both contributed equally to the collision / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $750, half the damage costs / Claim allowed in part. 

Tort / Negligence / Applicant and Respondent were driving through two-lane roundabout when their vehicles collided / Applicant’s insurer claimed Respondent was negligent in not stopping to give way at roundabout / Respondent claimed Applicant incorrectly changed lanes and caused the collision / Applicant claimed costs of $4,550.75 for damage to vehicle / Held: Applicant consistently and credibly described their route as entering the roundabout from southern approach and not northern approach as claimed by Respondent / Applicant followed natural lane marking or road, they did not make impermissible lane change / Respondent had duty to give way to traffic already on roundabout when approaching give way sign, and failed to do so / Point of impact indicated Applicant was already on lane before Respondent entered / Respondent was negligent and liable to pay reasonable costs of repair / Respondent to pay Applicant’s insurer $4,550.75 / Claim allowed.

Negligence / Dog Control Act 1996 / Applicant was driving in a 100km/h speed zone when two dogs owned by Respondent ran onto the road and collided with Applicant’s vehicle / Respondent admitted responsibility explaining he did not close his gate properly / Applicant’s insurer repaired Applicant’s vehicle and claimed compensation for the repair costs from Respondent / Held: Respondent breached his duty of care by failing to keep his dogs under control / Damage to Applicant’s vehicle was consistent with the collision / Repair costs were reasonable and properly evidenced / Respondent ordered to pay $7,175.40 to Applicant’s insurer / Claim allowed.

Negligence / Respondent’s employee was driving vehicle and collided with Applicant’s vehicle / Respondent’s vehicle damaged Applicant’s wakas and cradle / Applicant’s insurer claimed $12,760 in damages from Respondent / Held: Respondent liable for damages to one of Applicant’s waka and cradle / Reasonable care breached when Respondent failed to stop short of Applicant’s vehicle / Not satisfied that evidence proved other waka was also damaged in incident / Signs that cracks on it were previously fixed by tape and painted over / No load flag attached to wakas which caused difficulty in Respondent’s depth perception / Both parties have contributed to collision so both partially liable / Respondent liable for 70% of damages and ordered to pay $5,082 to Applicant’s insurer / Claim allowed in part.

Negligence / Applicant and Respondent were drivers involved in a collision on a rural highway / Police reporting indicated the Respondent was not travelling to the conditions and crossed the centre line / Respondent disputed liability / Applicant claimed $19,000.00, being the value of his vehicle, towing costs and loss of income / Held: Respondent liable in negligence for causing the collision/ Respondent would not have lost control and crossed the centre if she had been driving to the conditions / Compensation for vehicle price, towing, and loss income was reasonable  / Applicant was able to sell the wreck for $700 so that was deducted from the costs sought / Respondent ordered to pay $17,724.08 to Respondent / Claim allowed.

Negligence / Applicant was driving along the road when his vehicle was damaged by material / Applicant claimed material came off one of the Respondent’s truck that was travelling in the opposite direction / Applicant’s insurer accepted the claim / Applicant said repairs would cost around $9,000.00 / Vehicle was not repaired as the Applicant refused to pay the $750.00 excess / Applicant sought $750.00 from Respondent / Held: Applicant was unable to prove the material came from the Respondent’s truck / Uncertainty about where the Applicant’s car was when it was damaged / Uncertainty about whether the Respondent’s car was in the vicinity of the Applicant’s car when it was damaged / Claim dismissed.

Negligence / Applicant and Respondent were involved in car accident / Applicant drove straight through intersection / Respondent turned right from side street with give way sign and collided with Applicant / Respondent claimed intersection was blocked and Applicant was speeding / Applicant claimed $3482.55 for damage caused / Held: Respondent failed to give way and entered intersection without ensuring turn could be completed safely / Tribunal found Respondent’s maneuver unreasonable given vehicle size and traffic conditions / Tribunal rejected Respondent’s claims that Applicant was speeding or should have stopped due to insufficient evidence and conflicting accounts / No proof Applicant’s driving contributed to collision / Respondent and insurer ordered to pay Applicant and insurer $3482.55 / Claim allowed.

Negligence / Applicant parked her car on the street / When the Applicant came back to her vehicle, there was new damage to her car / Respondent was standing by the Applicant’s car, having just parked in the park next to her / Applicant said he told her he had scraped her car while parking and they exchanged details / Applicant submitted a claim to her insurer afterwards / Applicant and her insurer claimed $2,364.34 from Respondent for repairs to the vehicle /  Respondent denied liability on the basis that it was not him who caused the damage to the Applicant’s car / Respondent said there was no evidence that he had caused the damage, that he had never accepted liability and that Applicant’s insurer was just trying to extract money out of him / Held: more likely than not that the Respondent caused the damage to the Applicant’s car / Reasonable to infer that the Respondent accepted liability at the time / Claimed repairs costs of $2,364.34 were reasonable / Respondent ordered to pay $2,3…

Negligence / Land Transport Act 1998 / Applicant claimed he was about to exit a roundabout at an intersection when the Respondent entered the intersection colliding with his vehicle / Respondent admitted the collision occurred but denied liability claiming she did not see the Applicant, probably because he did not have his headlights on / Applicant claimed the cost of repair of $2,303.57 / Held: collision occurred at dawn at a well-lit roundabout / Even if the Applicant did not have his lights on, the Respondent should have been able to see him / Damage was consistent with the description of the collision / Cost claimed for the repairs was reasonable / Respondent ordered to pay $2,303.57 to the Applicant’s insurer / Claim allowed.

Negligence / Compensation / First Respondent involved in a collision with a car driven by the Applicant / Collision caused $3,348.51 worth of damage to Applicant’s vehicle / First Respondent did not dispute liability / First Respondent was driving a vehicle that belonged to the Second Respondent, her partner at the time / First Respondent agreed to pay Applicant $3,000.00 in instalments / Transpired that First Respondent paid Second Respondent $500 towards his insurance excess for his vehicle / First Respondent paid that amount believing it would remove any further liability on her to compensate Applicant / That did not occur / First Respondent no longer in contact with Second Respondent / First Respondent claimed a refund of $500 paid to Second Respondent / Held:  $500 was paid to Second Respondent as compensation towards repair cost of Applicant’s vehicle / Evidence suggested that sum was not used for that purpose / Second Respondent ordered to pay First Respondent $500 / Claim allow…