Consumer law / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicant engaged Respondent to install a vapour barrier / Later it was discovered water had rotted and damaged part of premises / Investigations showed a leaking pipe joint under the house had been taped over with black plastic tape / Applicant believed Respondent damaged pipe in the process of their work / Applicant claimed $19,814.50 to repair damage / Respondent denied damaging the pipe and believed it was caused by someone else / Held: more likely than not that damage to the pipe joint happened when Respondent was carrying out work / Respondent failed to provide its service with reasonable care and skill as it caused damage to a pipe that resulted in significant damage to premises / Failure was of a substantial character / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $19,814.50 / Claim allowed.
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.
2387 items matching your search terms
-
MD v U Ltd [2024] NZDT 578 (30 July 2024) [PDF, 101 KB] -
KI v Q Ltd [2024] NZDT 520 (30 July 2024) [PDF, 90 KB] Contract / Misrepresentation / Applicant engaged Respondent to sell his property / Respondent gave Applicant documents to sign / Applicant stated his understanding was marketing costs would be covered by the proceeds to sale / Respondent claimed Applicant understood marketing costs needed to be paid even if property remained unsold / Applicant sought order that he was not liable for marketing costs / Held: Respondent did not mislead the Applicant / Applicant needed to understand document they were executing / Applicant liable to pay marketing costs / Applicant ordered to pay Respondent $2,445.00 / Claim allowed.
-
IB v TT [2024] NZDT 588 (29 July 2024) [PDF, 172 KB] Contract / Misrepresentation / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 / Applicant entered into an agreement to purchase a property from the Respondent / Applicant got a building inspection done before purchase but not a specialised watertightness inspection / After settlement, Applicant noticed a leak in the garage / Applicant consulted plumbers but they could not provide a solution / Applicant concluded the Respondent knew about the leak / Applicant claimed $28,500.00 from Respondent, comprising $258.75 for legal costs, $230.00 for a private investigator, $460.00 for engineer’s report, $180.00 for filing fee, and $27,255.00 for estimated cost of repairing leak / Held: more likely than not that the Respondent knew about the leak / Applicant did not produce any evidence that Respondent made any statements that might have amounted to a misrepresentation / Respondent did not have legal duty to disclose the leak / Under the contract, Applicant bore the risk that there could be problems with …
-
MQ v CS [2024] NZDT 566 (29 July 2024) [PDF, 214 KB] Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicant sought Respondent's vehicle restoration services / Applicant claimed Respondent estimated job would cost $10,000 / Applicant paid $21,217 and job was only partially completed when he took vehicle away / Applicant also claimed Respondent caused damage to the vehicle / Held: Respondent's comment that the job was “doable” for $10,000 was inaccurate / Respondent failed to exercise reasonable care and skill in terms of costing / Applicant failed to prove Respondent caused damage to vehicle / Successful part of Applicant’s claim was that the cost of Respondent’s work was substantially beyond what Applicant expected he would have to pay / A reasonable consumer would not expect that the cost would be more than double what the skilled service provider said was doable / Applicant entitled to partial refund / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $4,417 / Claim allowed in part.
-
DO v CH [2024] NZDT 576 (29 July 2024) [PDF, 189 KB] Property / Applicant was head tenant of a property / Respondent moved into the flatting situation and signed a fixed term agreement for three months / Within three weeks of moving in Respondent advised he wished to move out in two weeks / Applicant claimed Respondent owed him $2,700.00 because he did not stay for fixed term as agreed / Held: Respondent breached agreement by leaving flat before fixed term ended / Respondent was legally liable to pay rent until end of term / Respondent stated he wanted to leave early as the property was unsanitary, but failed to provide evidence / However, Applicant had a duty to mitigate losses by finding a new flatmate as quickly as possible / Actual loss suffered as a result of Respondent’s breach was loss of rent between when he moved out and when a new tenant moved in / Applicant did not provide enough evidence to prove he was unable to find replacement flatmate until end of fixed term agreement / Applicant failed to prove he suffered a loss and tha…
-
FD v HO & MO [2024] NZDT 558 (29 July 2024) [PDF, 189 KB] Contract / Misrepresentation / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 / Applicant bought campervan from Respondent / Applicant claimed Respondent misrepresented capability of campervan to negotiate steep hills / Applicant sought to cancel contract, return campervan and have his $20,000 returned / Held: Applicant did not solely rely on Respondent's representation of vehicle but on his own experience of viewing and test driving the van when considering whether to purchase it / Applicant not induced to purchase by misrepresentation / Vehicle valued at price it sold for / Applicant not entitled to remedy / Claim dismissed.
-
HB v N Ltd [2024] NZDT 543 (29 July 2024) [PDF, 93 KB] Rehearing / Application for rehearing / Applicant claimed terms and conditions were only disclosed by Respondent to the court for previous hearing / Applicant also submitted that he wanted to claim against Respondent as she did not provide him with information which deprived him of a potential claim / Held: Tribunal found terms and conditions were discussed in some detail during the hearing / Applicant attempting to claim against same entity, in relation to the same facts, that were previously discussed / Application for rehearing declined / Claim dismissed.
-
MQ v N Inc [2024] NZDT 526 (26 July 2024) [PDF, 207 KB] Consumer law / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993/ Applicant entered into an agreement with Respondent to hire their premises for her son’s 21st birthday / Applicant claimed drinks were not supplied as requested and that the bar staff closed the bar an hour earlier than agreed / Furthermore, Applicant claimed that she is due a refund for unused bar tab funds / Applicant claimed $2,600.00 in compensation from Respondent which included $300.00 bond refund, $50.00 staff costs refund, $150.00 venue hire refund, $2,000.00 bar tab refund / Respondent denied any liability to pay compensation, as they said they had to close the bar early due to repeated prohibited behaviour by birthday-goers / Respondent also stated that their records showed the bar tab was expended on the night, apart from a small amount / Held: evidence indicated that guests were drinking in the carpark and toilets, that they were warned not to do this / Respondent was within their rights per the terms and conditions of venue hir…
-
D Ltd v IB [2024] NZDT 560 (26 July 2024) [PDF, 94 KB] Contract / Applicant provided stock valuation services to Respondent / Respondent had not paid Applicant as they believed the services were inaccurate / Applicant claimed payment / Held: contract provides for Applicant to complete an on-farm valuation with one valuer / Contract did not provide Respondent's presence to conduct valuations / Contract terms were performed / Respondent not entitled to cancel contract / Amount claimed reasonable / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $11,516.91 / Claim allowed.
-
SO v TH [2024] NZDT 536 (25 July 2024) [PDF, 235 KB] Jurisdiction / Industrial and Provident Societies Act 1908 / Disputes Tribunal Act 1988 / Applicant drove for a taxi company / Respondent was chairman of taxi organisation board / Applicant was unhappy with how the organisation was being operated / Applicant claimed Respondent was exercising more votes than allowed under the constitution, enabling him to control the organisation and benefit both in the running of his taxis and associated businesses / Applicant claimed for cost of legal expenses incurred in trying to challenge this / Held: no jurisdiction to hear claim / Applicant required to take matter up with the board / Industrial and Provident Societies Act provided it was District Court who had jurisdiction to hear such disputes, not Disputes Tribunal / Claim struck out.
-
KB v NX [2024] NZDT 510 (25 July 2024) [PDF, 184 KB] Contract law / Applicant entered into an agreement to purchase a section from Respondent / Section did not have a house as it had burnt down, and the debris had been removed / All that remained was a garage with an attached carport / Section was overgrown with vegetation and some rubbish / Agreement between the parties included a term that the vendor would remove any rubbish before settlement / Applicant claimed that on settlement Respondent had left some rubbish on the section that he had to disposed of / Applicant claimed to be compensated for the dump fees and related costs / Held: unable to establish that the remaining rubbish was part of what the Respondent agreed to remove / Photographic evidence included photo of Applicant’s trailer with branches still with green foliage / Consistent with the Applicant having cut the vegetation, but claiming it was rubbish left by Respondent / Applicant was not given permission to enter onto the land or to cut the vegetation, or remove the carpo…
-
XT v TT & C Ltd [2024] NZDT 622 (24 July 2024) [PDF, 286 KB] Tort law / Negligence / First Respondent was spray-painting at a property / Applicant’s vehicle was damaged by paint overspray while at the neighbouring premises owned by Second Respondent / Applicant made an insurance claim / Applicant’s insurer brings a claim against First Respondent and subsequently applied to join Second Respondent based on law of bailment / Held: First Respondent owed a duty of care to Applicant / First Respondent is personally liable for the damage he caused / Claim against second respondent is dismissed as they took all reasonable steps to prevent loss / Claim partly allowed, First Respondent to pay Applicant’s insurer $30,000 by 14 August 2024 / Claim against Second Respondent is dismissed.
-
M Ltd v G Ltd [2024] NZDT 561 (24 July 2024) [PDF, 189 KB] Tort / Conversion / Applicant sold vehicle to customer / Vehicle had issues and Applicant engaged Respondent to undertake repairs / Respondent engaged third-party repairer as work was outside Respondent’s expertise / Applicant refused to pay third-party repairer’s invoice as it was not made out to Applicant / Respondent refused to allow Applicant to retrieve vehicle / Issue with invoice finally resolved, but while pickup was being arranged, wheels were stolen from vehicle / Respondent sent Applicant invoice for cost of wheel replacement plus storage costs / Applicant claimed damages of $19,895.34 being price of car plus cost of repairs paid to Respondent / Held: Respondent did not prove they had a right to retain vehicle when Applicant attempted to retrieve it / Respondent converted Applicant's vehicle / Applicant entitled to damages / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $16,080.34 / Claim allowed in part.
-
SH v BU [2024] NZDT 552 (24 July 2024) [PDF, 92 KB] Contract / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 / Disputes Tribunal Act 1988 / Applicant successfully bid on a phone being sold by Respondent / Applicant paid $1,748.34 into Respondent’s bank account / Respondent told her he had not received the payment, that she could resend her payment and he would refund the first payment if it showed up / Applicant’s bank confirmed payment had been made / Applicant had not received phone or refund / Applicant claimed $2,368.34 for refund and time spent / Held: claim for time spent unable to be awarded / Applicant was induced into entering contract by misrepresentation by Respondent, namely that if she paid purchase price and shipping the phone would be sent to her / Respondent ordered to pay $1,748.34 / Claim allowed in part.
-
LT Ltd v IU [2024] NZDT 531 (24 July 2024) [PDF, 227 KB] Contract / Quasi-Contract / Applicant claimed it was contracted by the Respondent to supply staff Christmas hampers / Terms of these arrangements were agreed over a series of emails, rather than a formal, signed contract / Applicant received an email from the Respondent in September 2023 confirming the 2023 hamper project was proceeding / Applicant relied on that confirmation to order goods to ensure availability for late November and December / Applicant claimed it was therefore blindsided by a November 2023 email from the Respondent advising gift hampers would not proceed / Applicant sought $28,923.72 in losses for goods it ordered in reliance on the Respondent’s email / Respondent denied liability contending no contract was made and it was therefore not responsible for loss / Held: insufficient evidence to prove elements of a contract or quasi-contract were present between the parties for compensation to be awarded / Claim dismissed.
-
DH v FI [2024] NZDT 555 (23 July 2024) [PDF, 85 KB] Contract / Applicant loaned $2,600.00 bond money for a tenancy to her son and his partner, the Respondent / When tenancy ended, landlord refunded the bond equally between Applicant’s son and Respondent / Applicant’s son paid $1,300.00 to Applicant / Applicant claimed the other $1,300.00 from Respondent / Held: no written record of the loan agreement to clarify the intended parties / Not proven that the loan was to Applicant’s son and Respondent jointly, rather than just to Applicant’s son / Claim dismissed.
-
MG v L Ltd [2024] NZDT 548 (23 July 2024) [PDF, 96 KB] Contract / Tort / Disputes Tribunal Act 1988 / One of the Respondent's properties neighboured the Applicant's property / Respondent's tenant crashed it into Applicant's garage and damaged it / Applicant paid $2,300.00 to get it repaired / Applicant claimed $2,300.00 from Respondent / Held: Respondent not be liable in contract to pay for damage its tenant caused to someone else’s property / No contract between Respondent and Applicant / Law relating to vicarious liability cannot extend to Respondent in the circumstances / Tribunal did not jurisdiction in the matter / Claim dismissed.
-
MN v QL [2024] NZDT 542 (23 July 2024) [PDF, 143 KB] Contract / Property Law Act 2007 / Applicant paid Respondent $20,000.00 / Applicant sought refund of payment / Respondent claimed money was a deposit on a house Respondent was going to sell to Applicant / Respondent claimed he had to sell house to another party for less because Applicant did not go through with purchase / Respondent counterclaimed $30,000.00 for loss / Held: parties did not have written agreement for sale / Even if there was an enforceable verbal contract, no evidence that a condition of verbal contract was that Applicant’s $20,000.00 was non-revokable or refundable if Applicant decided not to proceed / Respondent would be unjustly enriched if he were to keep Applicant’s $20,000.00 / Applicant entitled to be paid back $20,000.00 as it was not a gift and not part of an enforceable term of a contract / Respondent not entitled to any other sum representing loss made by not selling to Applicant / Claim allowed / Counterclaim dismissed.
-
NC v KD & CD [2024] NZDT 535 (22 July 2024) [PDF, 189 KB] Consumer law / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Fair Trading Act 1986 / Applicant booked Respondents’ accommodation for four nights / Respondents advertised property as being in a “peaceful rural setting” / Due to road noise, Applicant only stayed for three of the four nights / Applicant claimed a refund of $780.00 for four nights’ accommodation / Applicant claimed Respondents’ advertisement was misleading / Applicant also claimed accommodation service provided was unsatisfactory regarding readiness for guests / Held: word “peaceful” in advertisement was misleading / Applicant entitled to a full refund for fourth night and a 30 percent discount for the other three nights / Accommodation had value for Applicant for the days he decided to remain there / Respondents did not provide accommodation service with reasonable care and skill / Applicant’s failure to contact Respondents regarding defects in service resulted in a loss of right to compensation / Respondents ordered to refund $351.50 /…
-
EQ & KQ v S Ltd [2024] NZDT 606 (22 July 2024) [PDF, 114 KB] Contract / Applicants purchased a new build property from Respondent / When Applicants moved in they discovered the gas califont had been removed and that work required to meet resource consent requirements had not been completed / Applicants initially claimed $30,000.00 for remedial work, replacement of califont and legal fees, but reduced their claim following completion of further work by both parties / Held: most probable the califont was missing prior to settlement / Applicants entitled to cost of replacing califont, $2,207.00 / Applicants entitled to reimbursement for costs incurred carrying out work that was Respondent’s responsibility: $475.75 for paint and landscaping supplies / Applicants’ legal costs were a consequential loss suffered due to Respondent’s failure to provide property as contracted for, entitled to $4000.00 / Respondent ordered to pay Applicants $6,682.75 / Claim allowed.
-
TK v BD & TT Ltd [2024] NZDT 530 (22 July 2024) [PDF, 215 KB] Contract / Consumer law / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicant got tattoos from the First Respondent / Applicant claimed First Respondent used expired tattoo ink and provided poor workmanship in relation to the tattoos / Applicant also claimed First Respondent told him to change his tattoo image / Applicant claimed $12,614.00 for refund, cost of tattoo removal and cost of legal advice and associated time off work / Respondent counterclaimed $4,200.00 for loss of revenue and $1200.00 for a days’ lost work as Applicant cancelled final appointment / Held: Applicant failed to prove that the ink used had expired / Evidence indicated that it was the Applicant’s decision to change the tattoo image / Applicant failed to prove that the First Respondent did not provide his service with reasonable care and skill / Neither party can claim for costs / Claim against Second Respondent struck out / Claim and counterclaim dismissed.
-
OQ v QM & ors [2024] NZDT 539 (22 July 2024) [PDF, 166 KB] Nuisance / Property / Applicant and First Respondent were neighbours / First Respondent contracted Second Respondent to build retaining wall on First Respondent’s land near the Applicant’s boundary / Applicant claimed construction work occurred within root zone of his gum tree, and interference meant tree died and had to be removed / Applicant claimed $14,409.26 monetary loss incurred as consequence of tree being killed / Second Respondent cross-claimed for costs incurred preparing for hearing / Held: construction work disturbed tree’s root zone with detrimental effect on the tree such that it died and had to be cut down / An occupier entitled to cut back to the boundary overhanging branches or encroaching roots of a neighbour’s trees providing it is done with reasonable care / Insufficient evidence that Respondents failed to exercise reasonable care / Claim dismissed / Second Respondent’s cross-claim dismissed.
-
LG v C Ltd [2024] NZDT 518 (22 July 2024) [PDF, 178 KB] Contract / Consumers Guarantees Act 1993 / Respondent operates business leasing out shipping containers as storage containers / Applicant stored belongings in leased storage container / When decanted Applicant’s belongings were mouldy / Applicant claims refund / Held: services must be fit for its intended purpose / Applicant unable to prove Respondent breached guarantee that container was not fit for purpose / No evidence provided for damage and costs / Claim dismissed.
-
E Ltd v MN as trustee of NC Family Trust & OC [2024] NZDT 182 (22 July 2024) [PDF, 165 KB] Trust law / Applicant carried out accounting work for the family trust / First Respondent was trustee at the time / Second Respondent had resigned as trustee two months before relevant period / Applicant claimed payment of outstanding invoices being $12,062.35 / Held: First Respondent liable to pay for services performed, as trustee instructing Applicants to carry out services for the trust, / First Respondent ordered to pay Applicants $12,062.35 / Claim allowed.
-
GT v O Ltd [2024] NZDT 554 (20 July 2024) [PDF, 175 KB] Consumer law / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicant purchased her daughter’s school uniform from the Respondent / Applicant purchased a size 12 skirt but later discovered it did not fit / Applicant returned the skirt to Respondent, swapped it for a size 14 and purchased a second size 14 skirt / Applicant laundered skirts / When school started Applicant found that the skirts were too large / Applicant had one of the skirts altered so that her daughter could wear it to school / Applicant wished to return both skirts / Respondent said it would it accept the skirt that had been laundered but refused to take the altered skirt / Applicant claimed $500.00 for a refund on two skirts and compensation for inconvenience and loss of use / Held: insufficient evidence that skirts were not within a correct size range for a kids size 14 school uniform skirt / No proven breach of guarantee / No evidence that the skirt was otherwise faulty / Claim dismissed.