Disputes Tribunal of New Zealand

Contract / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 (CCLA) / Applicant sent parcel to its customer / Parcel was scanned into First Respondent’s facility and remained there for some time / Parcel was scanned multiple times until eventually it was scanned no more and was not located in the facility / Applicant filed a loss claim with First Respondent / First Respondent accepted claim with a “pre-approved value 8000” and paid Applicant $2,000.00, in accordance with CCLA liability limitation / Later, First Respondent explained that the “pre-approved value 8000” was a mistake / Applicant claimed parcel was worth $10,000.00 and had been stolen / Applicant’s receipt for item was for $8,709.58 / Held: fate of parcel remains unknown / Applicant’s claim of theft not proven / Contract was at owner’s risk / First Respondent had no liability for loss or damage unless loss or damage was intentional / No evidence of intentional loss / First Respondent not liable for loss / Claim dismissed.

Contract / Applicant leased premises from Respondent / After issues with roof leaking, parties inserted Special Condition relating to weathertightness into lease / Premises had ongoing leak issues / Respondent had tradesmen attend for repairs, but leaks were unresolved / Applicant stopped paying rent for 10 months before lease ended / Applicant claimed for a declaration of non-liability for rent arrears, damages for loss of profit and damage to stock / Respondent counterclaimed for rent arrears / Held: Special Condition allowed Applicant to suspend rent when notice of leak had been given and not remedied / Requirements for suspension of rent met for total period of 33 weeks / Applicant liable to pay remaining 9 weeks and 4 days unpaid rent / Insufficient evidence for lost profit and damaged stock claims / Applicant ordered to pay Respondent $8,323.74 / Claim allowed in part.

Consumer law / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicants contracted Respondent to paint home for $25,600.00 / Applicants became concerned about quality and time the job was taking / Applicants hired a painter to repaint part of the property for $4,600.00 / Applicants requested Respondent finish repainting gutters and leave property / Parties agreed remaining $5,000.00 owing to contract price would be used for completion and remedial work / Respondent confirmed agreement was settled / Applicants lodged claim with insurer for damage and received a $28,944.31 cash settlement / Applicant’s insurer sought $30,000.00 from Respondent including $400 excess / Held: Applicants and insurer barred from claiming remedial work / Matter had already been settled / Respondent not provided opportunity to complete remedial work / Claim dismissed.

Trespass and Contract law / Third party parked car owned by Applicant on street / Respondent issued breach notice to third party but third party moved countries and did not receive notice / Respondent contacted Applicant for original fine and late fees / Applicant claims they are not liable to pay the amount sough of $500 in relation to late fees and debt collection fees / Held: Applicant has trespassed onto third party’s land / No contract was formed between parties for parking on third party’s land, therefore no agreement to pay late fees or debt collection fees / Claim allowed, Applicant to pay respondent $95 being original breach amount but not liable to pay other amounts being late fees or debt collection fees.

Property / Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) / Respondent moved into small room in Applicant's property before moving into large room / Respondent paid rent of $280.00 per week inconsistently over a period / Applicant claimed $4,790.00 for unpaid rent and $140.00 for music festival ticket / Held: Tribunal had jurisdiction / RTA did not apply to tenancy as Applicant continued to use premises principally as place of residence / Evidence of quasi-contractual agreement that rent of $150.00 per week was to be paid during time in small room / Evidence of agreement to pay rent of $280.00 per week during time in larger room / Respondent not liable to pay rent for entire period claimed / Respondent did not dispute ticket / Respondent ordered to pay $1,910.00 / Claim allowed in part.

Insurance law / Applicant bought a unit in 2016 / Applicant entered into agreement with Respondent for house insurance / Following inquiries by Respondent in 2023, insurance was cancelled as Applicant’s unit was a “stacked” unit / Applicant claimed $9,172.95, refund of premium payments over the years / Held: Respondents took reasonable steps when deciding to provide insurance / Applicant did not prove Respondent should have realised problem earlier / Respondent entitled to cancel policy / Evidence showed Respondent would have honoured policy during insured period / Applicant not entitled to a refund / Claim dismissed.

Contract / Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) / Applicant owned property / Respondent moved into room at property and was to pay rent of $280.00 per week / Respondent paid $280.00 once / Respondent later paid a further $600.00 / Applicant claimed $6,160.00 for unpaid rent / Held: RTA did not apply to agreement between parties / Applicant was owner of property and used property as his principal place of residence, therefore tenancy was outside jurisdiction of the Tenancy Tribunal and claim could be heard by Disputes Tribunal / Parties agreed Respondent would pay $280.00 per week while living at property / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $5,560.00 being the actual amount of unpaid rent / Claim partially allowed.

Contract / Misrepresentation / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 / Applicant purchased second hand baler from Respondent / Respondent stated baler was in good working condition / Applicant took baler to get checked by mechanic who found it needed repairs /  Applicant claimed Respondent misrepresented machine which induced him to buy it / Applicant claimed $6,659.79 plus GST / Held: misrepresentation was proven / Applicant suffered additional costs of transporting baler to the mechanic / Applicant entitled to damages / Respondent much pay Applicant $7,388.75, purchase price of baler, transportation costs and GST / Claim granted.

Contract / Property Law Act 2007 / Parties purchased house together / Each party owned one third share / Relationship between parties broke down / Respondent convicted of assault and bailed away from house / Respondent stopped contributing to mortgage and outgoings / Parties agreed to sell house / Applicants claimed $10,000 for Respondent’s unpaid contributions / Respondent counterclaimed $16,706.43 for costs relating to property / Held: parties had agreed to equal contributions to property outgoings, and equal shares in proceeds from any sale / Respondent being bailed away from address did not absolve him of responsibility for contributions / Respondent liable for $9,120 mortgage contributions / None of Respondent’s counterclaims successful / Orders made for equal distribution of sale proceeds minus deductions for successful claims / Claim allowed and counterclaim dismissed.

Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 / Applicant engaged Respondent to move house contents / Afterwards, Applicant discovered several items were missing and many items were damaged or broken / Applicant claimed $10,100.00 compensation / Held: more likely than not that the items were damaged or went missing while in Respondent’s care / Parties’ contract for carriage stated all goods were carried and or stored at owner’s risk / Respondent did not intentionally damage or lose Applicant’s goods / Applicant’s claim not proven / Claim dismissed.

Rehearing / Respondent applied for a rehearing because he missed call for original hearing / Held: no procedural unfairness when a party was informed of hearing date and choose not to attend / No miscarriage of justice from not being heard, as Respondent did not present evidence to support his claims / Rehearing not granted / Claim dismissed.

Negligence / Vicarious liability / Applicant purchased wine barrels from Respondent / Respondent’s staff member assisted with carrying the barrels to Applicant’s vehicle and loading them / Applicant claimed barrel slipped and scratched his bumper / Applicant sought $773.38 for repairs / Respondent claimed it was a “joint lift”, it was Applicant’s side that slipped and it was not intentional nor careless by the staff member / Respondent paid half of Applicant’s repair invoice ($386.69) on the basis the Applicant shared the blame for damage / Held: no evidence Respondent’s staff member breached his duty of care / Respondent not vicariously liable for damage / Claim dismissed.

Contract / Applicant conducted business from Respondent’s shop / Parties signed agreement detailing arrangement / Respondent later informed Applicant that the agreement was cancelled / Applicant claimed compensation for loss of income and related costs / Applicant claimed cancellation was unjustified and unlawful / Held: Applicant had contractual license to occupy part of Respondent’s premises / Respondent had legal freedom to revoke license at any time for any reason / Applicant had same freedom to cancel at any time for any reason / No agreement that consent of other party was required for revocation or cancellation / Respondent under no legal obligation to continue with arrangement / Respondent not liable for any costs or losses incurred / Claim dismissed.