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

2655 items matching your search terms

  1. F Ltd v O Ltd [2023] NZDT 374 (28 July 2023) [PDF, 117 KB]

    Contract / Dispute over work done by Applicant for Respondent / Applicant sought $990.00 for work / Respondent claimed no agreement to do any work and that no money was owed / No written evidence of agreement / Held: no agreement as to price / Job done for a friend whilst socialising / Applicant not entitled to charge a trade mark-up for materials or labour / Applicant entitled to paid for materials obtained for the work / Invoice for materials for an wholesaler / Implausible that Applicant would have ordered parts without believing there was an agreement that he would carry out work / Crimp tool listed on the invoice not a part provided for Respondent / Applicant entitled to $470.00 for materials, invoice minus the crimp tool / Claim allowed in part.

  2. TD & LD v GP & Q Ltd [2023] NZDT 377 (28 July 2023) [PDF, 204 KB]

    Contract / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 / Applicants booked accommodation with Respondent through third party website / Applicants chose not to travel to accommodation due to weather event / Applicants claimed damages of $379.04 being amount paid to book accommodation / Whether claim should be against Respondent or third party website / Whether booking contract was frustrated / Whether Applicants entitled to remedy / Held: claim made against correct party, agents generally not liable under contract / Booking not frustrated, Applicants could have travelled to accommodation despite weather event / Applicants not entitled to remedy / Claim dismissed.

  3. X Ltd v LG [2023] NZDT 358 (28 July 2023) [PDF, 95 KB]

    Contract / Agency / Applicant contracted by Respondent for forestry services / Applicant would sell logs, deduct sub-contractors’ invoices, before passing balance of revenue to Respondent / Final lot of logs was sold during period when sub-contracting work could not be completed / Instead of following usual process, Applicant passed final payment on to Respondent then invoiced Respondent for sub-contracting work at later date / Respondent refused to pay invoice / Applicant had already paid sub-contractor / Applicant claimed invoiced amount of $6781.55 plus legal fees / Held: Applicant was Respondent’s agent / Applicant had actual authority (implied) to contract sub-contractor and receive payment from Respondent for work / Limited circumstances for Tribunal to award legal fees not met / Respondent ordered to pay $6781.55 / Claim allowed.

  4. OX v B Ltd [2023] NZHC 292 (28 July 2023) [PDF, 240 KB]

    Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA) / Applicant bought B Ltd’s earbuds / Applicant noticed that right earbud kept dying after short use and was not charging correctly / Applicant claimed refund of purchase price / Held: CGA states that products should be safe, of acceptable quality and free of defects / Applicant’s earbuds have not lasted a reasonable period / Applicant entitled to refund of purchase price / Claim allowed / Respondent to pay Applicant $334.99.

  5. ED Ltd v TQ Ltd [2023] NZDT 312 (27 July 2023) [PDF, 221 KB]

    Contract / Money Claims Act 2016 / Applicant engaged Respondent to supply metal windows and matching double door / Applicant paid 50% deposit / Building delay / Price increase due to inflation and availability changes / Applicant claimed Respondent obliged to perform contract at quoted price / Respondent declined to proceed / Applicant proposed repayment of deposit plus sum for damages / Held: Respondent's terms and conditions applied / No repudiation of contract by Respondent / Respondent not entitled to protect Applicant from price increase / Applicant not entitled to claim damages in form of interest or otherwise / Reasonable for Respondent to pay interest based on failure to repay original deposit money immediately upon agreeing refund was payable / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $274.49 / Claim allowed in part.

  6. C Ltd v Q Ltd & D Ltd [2023] NZDT 289 (27 July 2023) [PDF, 250 KB]

    Consumer / Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 / Applicant purchased trailer from Respondent / Applicant alleged design of trailer is defective and as a result the trailer is sustaining damage when being towed even without load / Applicant claimed refund of purchase price / Held: no evidence to suggest that problem is due to failure of any particular component / Warranty does not cover type of defect alleged / No proven breach of condition that goods must be of merchantable quality / No legal basis to require Respondent to refund purchase price / Claim dismissed.

  7. IU Ltd v NO [2023] NZDT 409 (26 July 2023) [PDF, 95 KB]

    Contract / Respondent contacted Applicant seeking legal assistance with relationship property matter / Applicant sent respondent engagement letter setting out fee structure and terms and conditions / Respondent acknowledged receipt by email but never signed it / Respondent paid first invoice but not second or third / Applicants sent debt to collection agencies / Applicant claimed for unpaid invoices / Held: no genuine dispute raised by Respondent / Penalty interest allowed / Collection agency fees allowed / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $4,016.55 / Claim allowed.

  8. BE v TD Ltd [2023] NZDT 317 (25 July 2023) [PDF, 190 KB]

    Consumer law / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicant purchased car from Respondent / Issue arose with knocking noise in vehicle’s steering rack / Respondent paid cost of second hand replacement rack / Knocking continued, Applicant had car checked again / Mechanic reported car would fail WOF, but further report stated car would pass WOF, noting knock as warning for potential future wear / Applicant considered car unwarrantable, requested refund / Respondent instead offered repair with another second hand replacement rack / Applicant consented but said repair made no difference / Applicant claimed cost of fitting new steering rack, or refund of purchase price, plus additional expenses / Held: Applicant did not prove car was not of acceptable quality / Preponderance of evidence established that slight knock was normal for this model of car, did not prevent its safety, drivability, or warrantability / Claim dismissed.

  9. N Ltd v SQ & TQ [2023] NZDT 314 (25 July 2023) [PDF, 182 KB]

    Contract / Consumer Law / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA) / Fair Trading Act 1986 (FTA) / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 / Respondents engaged Applicant’s architectural services / Applicant worked on project for around 15 months before Respondents cancelled contract / Applicant claimed $17,934.54 for unpaid invoices / Respondents counter-claimed $24,263.71 refund of invoices paid / Held: agreement was that Applicant would charge no more than $28,750 plus 20% for core services, additional services to be charged at hourly rate with approval / Applicant breached contract by not completing agreed work within agreed price / Applicant also breached CGA by not providing services with reasonable care and skill / Applicant did not deliberately underquote, was not in breach of FTA / Applicant’s work still of some value to Respondents, Respondents not entitled to full refund / Applicant ordered to pay Respondents $5,863.31 / Claim dismissed, counterclaim allowed in part.  

  10. X Ltd v K Ltd [2023] NZDT 284 (25 July 2023) [PDF, 93 KB]

    Contract / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 / Applicant purchased tractor duals from Respondent / Applicant was to pick up duals from Respondent’s yard but they had been stolen / Applicant and Respondent received advice that the other party was the owner and so could not make insurance claim / Applicant claimed refund of $2,000 purchase price / Held: Applicant was the owner of duals at the time they were stolen / Insurable risk passed at same time ownership passed / Respondent not required to compensate applicant for breach of contract because no breach has occurred / Claim dismissed.

  11. TG v AM & PD Ltd [2023] NZDT 368 (24 July 2023) [PDF, 121 KB]

    Negligence / Contributory Negligence Act 1947 / Land Transport Act 1988 / Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004 / Parties involved in three-car collision / Applicant driving first car, stopped short of another collision ahead / Second car, driven by Third Respondent, shunted into Applicant’s car by third car, driven by First Respondent in course of employment for Second Respondent / Applicant and insurer claimed $2975.95 for insured losses from First and Second Respondents / Third Respondent and insurer claimed $25,597.26 for repairs and rental car from First and Second Respondents / Second Respondent claimed $19,000 from Applicant and Third Respondent for repairs to car driven by First Respondent / Held: First Respondent failed to allow enough time to stop, was responsible for collision / Second Respondent vicariously liable / First and Second Respondents ordered to pay Applicant and Third Respondent’s insurer total of $28,573.21 / Claim allowed.

  12. NQ & TQ v WQ [2023] NZDT 360 (24 July 2023) [PDF, 106 KB]

    Loan / Interest on Money Claims Act 2016 (IMCA) / Applicants advanced Respondent $13,609.00 / Applicants claimed advance was personal loan and should be repaid / Applicants claimed interest of 6.25% applied to loan / Held: evidence proved advance was personal loan / No evidence that 6.25% interest was term of agreement / Interest of 5% to apply from date of demand letter in accordance with IMCA / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $14,073.19 / Claim granted in part.

  13. D Ltd v BE [2023] NZDT 346 (21 July 2023) [PDF, 113 KB]

    Contract / Construction / Applicant engaged by Respondent to undertake residential building work / Final two invoices were in dispute / First invoice for fence contracted separately to the main building / Second dispute for time spent liaising with sub-contractors to gather compliance paper work / Applicants claimed $17,066.27 plus interest at 15% for total outstanding invoiced amounts / Held: work liaising with sub-contractor requested by Respondent for their benefit and part of the contract / Applicants supplied cedar for fence as invoiced / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $12,466.50 / Claim allowed.

  14. UH v N Ltd [2023] NZDT 306 (21 July 2023) [PDF, 136 KB]

    Consumer law / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicant engaged Respondent to engrave two antique watches / Both watches were damaged during engraving / Applicant claimed compensation for cost of repairing watches / Held: Respondent failed to use reasonable care and skill / Respondent was given reasonable opportunity to remediate defect, but no remediation was offered / Applicant entitled to have defect remediated elsewhere / Respondent liable for repair cost / Respondent still entitled to engraving fee / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $625 / Claim allowed.

  15. EN & ND v QI & MI [2023] NZDT 272 (21 July 2023) [PDF, 181 KB]

    Contract / Applicants purchased a house from Respondent / After settlement, Applicants discovered toilet did not work properly /  Plumber found drain was blocked by tree roots / Applicants asked Respondent to pay for repairs / Respondent did not pay / Applicants claimed toilet repair costs of $607.89 and filing fee / / Held: more likely than not that Respondent was responsible for repair cost / Pipes had tree roots interfering with them which had to be removed before pipes could be repaired / Suggested problem with the toilet was imminent and not in reasonable working order / Respondent breached their obligation by not paying for repairs / Tribunal unable to award costs for filing fee / Respondent ordered to pay Applicants $607.89 / Claim granted.

  16. KK v HL [2023] NZDT 381 (20 July 2023) [PDF, 223 KB]

    Misrepresentation / Applicant purchased car from Respondent / Applicant subsequently discovered a warning light which appeared on the dashboard / Applicant seeks to reject the car and claim a full refund of $5,800.00 / Held: Respondent did not misrepresent the car when they sold it to the Applicant / Respondent did not induce the Applicant to purchase it / Respondent provided a complete auto repair report outlining any possible problems at the time of purchase / Claim dismissed.

  17. JD v SL [2023] NZDT 364 (20 July 2023) [PDF, 185 KB]

    Negligence / Respondent drove into parked cars while driving Applicant’s car/ Respondent advised afterwards that he did not have a driver’s licence /Applicant’s car was not drivable and had to be towed away / Car was written off / Applicant’s car was insured for $5,000.00 / Insurance company would not accept claim as damage occurred when car was driven by an unlicensed driver / Respondent accepted liability for damage and agreed to pay for it at a sum of $85.00 per week / Respondent paid $425.00 before payments stopped / Applicant claimed $5,500.00 for loss of insured value of car, $280 for towing fee and $180 Tribunal filing fee / Held: Respondent failed to take reasonable care whilst driving / Car insured for $5,000.00 which was reasonable estimate of value of car / Towing should be deducted from amount owing as offset by amount of selling car wreck / Amount paid by Respondent should be deducted too / Filing fee cost cannot be claimed in the circumstances / Respondent ordered to pay …

  18. KK v HL [2023] NZDT 290 (20 July 2023) [PDF, 233 KB]

    Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Fair Trading Act 1986 / Respondent advertised his car for sale online / Applicant took car out for test drive / Applicant bought car some days later / Applicant paid Respondent $5,800.00 / Applicant noticed warning sign on car and asked Respondent for a refund / Applicant claimed refund / Respondent did not misrepresent car when selling to Applicant / Applicant was not induced to buy car by misrepresentation / Claim dismissed.

  19. O Ltd v MX & V Ltd [2023] NZDT 325 (20 July 2023) [PDF, 173 KB]

    Contract / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 / Applicant and First Respondent had loan agreement / First Respondent’s car was security for loan / Car was stolen by third party, then sold to Second Respondent, who sent car to Third Respondent to be auctioned / Third Respondent contacted Applicant about security interest, Applicant said not to sell car / First Respondent defaulted on loan with Applicant / Applicant claimed for possession of car / Held: Car was stolen and sold to Second Respondent without First Respondent’s consent / First Respondent remained rightful owner, Second Respondent did not acquire any right to car / Applicant had valid security interest in car, was now entitled to possession / Claim allowed.

  20. TD v SS & UU [2023) NZDT 318 (20 July 2023) [PDF, 124 KB]

    Contract / Fair Trading Act 1986 / Applicant signed contract for building company to build house / Applicant paid deposit of $23,500 / Work began on concept drawings / No further progress made, Applicant informed First Respondent he wished to cancel contract / Building company placed into liquidation having not built house or repaid deposit / First Respondent promised to repay deposit / Applicant claims Respondents engaged in misleading and deceptive conduct by contracting to build house knowing completion was impossible given company’s financial situation / Applicant seeks compensation for lost deposit from First Respondent who is sole director of building company and/or Second Respondent who was employed at relevant time / Held: when contract entered company was trading and operating / Applicant has not been able to prove misleading or deceptive conduct that led to loss of deposit / First Respondent has been adjudicated bankrupt so claim cannot proceed against him / Second Respondent…

  21. NF Ltd v CM [2023] NZDT 379 (19 July 2023) [PDF, 204 KB]

    Contract / Consumer law / Consumer Guarantees Act / Respondent ordered firewood from Applicant / Firewood was delivered / Respondent did not pay invoice / Applicant attempted to follow up, received no response / Respondent emailed Applicant some 10 months later, acknowledging outstanding account and requesting revision of price, claiming firewood was wet / Applicant advised price could not be revised, given time passed / Applicant referred matter to debt collection agency / Applicant claimed $870 for firewood and $121.90 for debt collection costs / Held: no evidence firewood not of acceptable quality / Respondent obliged to pay for firewood / Terms of sale included clause that recovery costs would be added if account became overdue / Respondent liable for costs of debt collection / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $991.90 / Claim allowed.