Employment Court of New Zealand Te Kōti Take Mahi o Aotearoa

Contract / Property / Applicant purchased house from Respondent / Applicant found lights did not work in rainy weather and also incomplete earthquake repairs / Applicant and agent had problems with lights at viewings for property prior to settlement / Applicant found original floors present and peeling paint from windows, soffits and fascia boards / Chimney was not repaired / Only two of three EQC scopes of repair for property were available to purchasers / Third EQC scope allowed for removal and replacement of floors, painting on soffits and fascias, removal of chimney and associated repairs / Applicant was quoted $19,000 for repairs / Applicant claimed for costs to remedy issues with property / Held: failure of lights was breach by Respondent of warranty in agreement that utility or amenity systems for property were in good working order / Failure to disclose third EQC scope was misrepresentation by Respondent about status of earthquake repairs / Applicant's understanding that Respon…

Negligence / Applicant and Respondent involved in vehicle collision / Applicant claimed vehicle's pre-accident value plus towing, storage and assessment costs less salvage cost / Respondent counter-claimed repairs to his vehicle / Held: Respondent caused collision by failing to make sure the road was clear before pulling out on the road / Applicant not liable to pay damages to Respondent's vehicle / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant's insurer $5,262.25 / Counter-claim dismissed / Claim allowed.

Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA) / Applicant paid $1776.75 to Respondent for five cubic meters of concrete / Concrete arrived late and was too dry for laying / Applicant rejected the concrete and sought compensation / Applicant claimed $1,776.75 for costs of concrete, $1,552.50 for the cost of contractors, and $750 for his time and general damages / Held: Concrete was too dry at time of delivery and was not fit for purpose / This constituted a failure of substantial character under the CGA / Applicant entitled to reject concrete and claim a refund for amount paid / Applicant entitled to compensation for two hours of contractors’ time, being $154.75 and $80.50 / Applicant entitled to $143.14 for time he had to take off work for concrete to be laid / General damages not able to be awarded / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $2,155.14 / Claim allowed in part.

Construction law / Contract / Building Act 2004 / Applicant agreed to remove existing deck and build new deck at Respondent’s property / Deck had not been completed / Applicant pulled their workers from site due to unpaid invoices / Respondents claimed defects in job, damage, wasted and additional costs incurred and consequential loss / Applicants claimed payment for unpaid invoices / Held: majority of work done with reasonable care and skill, but Tribunal identified some defects including incorrect deck pile setup and other defects / Respondent entitled to compensation for defects and inconvenience caused by substandard work / Applicant entitled to payment for unpaid invoices excluding any interest / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant / Claim allowed in part.

Negligence / Land Transport Act 1998 / Applicant and Respondent were involved in vehicle accident / Respondent on Learner's Licence and drove without supervision / Applicant claimed $13,998.98 compensation for vehicle damages / Held: Respondent breached his duty of care because he failed to take reasonable care when driving and to make sure the way was clear whilst performing a u-turn / Respondent was negligent and therefore liable / Reasonable costs include estimated market value of Applicant's vehicle, towing fees and wreck value / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $12,368.98 / Claim allowed.

Contract / Applicant contracted to move cabins purchased by respondent / Respondents refused to pay invoice because cabins were damaged / Respondent said Applicant damaged cabins while moving them / Applicant claimed for payment of its invoice / Respondent counterclaimed for payment of costs to repair cabins / Held - Respondents liable to pay invoice as Applicant had provided services they were contracted to / Respondents unable to prove Applicants had damaged cabins / Claim successful / Counterclaim dismissed.

Contract / Building / Fair Trading Act 1986 / Applicant claimed she accepted a quote to redo her bathroom from Respondent who represented himself as a builder / Agreed price was $38,180.00, excluding the supply of tiles / Applicant said she paid a deposit of $11,454.00 / Applicant said that she and Respondent visited the supplier where she selected tiles / Respondent advised that he had an account and could receive the trade rate / Applicant paid the Respondent $2,479.67 for tiles and delivery / Applicant made an enquiry about the delivery time but received no response / Applicant then contacted the supplier who advised that no order had been made and the Respondent did not have a trade account / Applicant emailed Respondent for a refund / Months later the Respondent apologised for his actions / Applicant claimed $13,933.67, comprising a deposit of $11,454.00 and $2,479.67 for the tiles / Held: Respondent breached the contract by failing to perform his obligations / Applicant received …

Consumer law / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Fair Trading Act 1986 / Applicant took car to Respondent to inspect and repair car for certification / Applicant paid and Respondent substantially completed work, but the certifier who worked for Respondent lost ability to certify cars before Applicant's car was certified / Applicant had repairs and certification completed by another provider / Applicant claimed for refund from Respondent as well as for other repair work done, legal fees and stress / Held: services provided by Respondent were not fit for purpose / Applicant took car to Respondent for express purpose of having it certified and Respondent was unable to do that / Insufficient evidence to  establish deceptive conduct by Respondent / Respondent could not remedy failure due to inability to certify cars so refund of money paid to Respondent by Applicant was appropriate / Claim for compensation of cost of going to other providers for repairs was not allowed as Applicant was always …

Contract / Misrepresentation / Property / Applicants inspected Respondent's house to purchase / EQC report not provided / Applicant withdrew contract / Applicant claimed to recover costs expended on lawyers and building report / Held: Respondent did not have to inform Applicant house was purchased on an "as is, where is" basis / Respondent's statement that all documentation for house was with their lawyers did not mean a specific promise or statement about there being an EQC report / Respondent's statement that the house was perfect was not a promise of a house with no defects / No misrepresentation on Respondent's part / Claim dismissed.

Tort / Applicants alleged Respondent threw a bucket of paint onto their property causing damage / Applicants and their insurer claimed $4,518.17 from Respondent, comprising $4000.00 insured costs and Applicants’ $500.00 insurance excess / Held: Respondent unlawfully caused damage to Applicants’ property / Matter was reported to Police / Evidence showed paint splashed on property / Insurer’s assessor’s costs report accepted / Respondent order to pay Applicants’ insurer $4,518.17 / Applicants’ insurer ordered to pay $500 insurance excess to Applicants / Claim allowed.

Contract / Contract and Commercial Law Act / Breach of Contract / Respondent and Applicant entered agreement for sale of relocatable villa / Parties agreed deposit would be paid immediately and the balance at a later date / Respondent signed contract prepared by Applicant which Respondent did not realise had different date for final payment than agreed / Dispute arose about date of settlement / Respondent did not proceed with purchase / Applicant claimed for balance of purchase price / Respondent counterclaimed for return of deposit / Held - Respondent breached contract by choosing to not proceed with purchase / Respondent not liable to pay balance as steps available to mitigate their loss were not taken by Respondent and their insistence on earlier settlement date was unjustified / Applicant not entitled to refund of deposit as her breach of contract had caused loss to Respondent / Claim dismissed / Counterclaim dismissed.

Contract / Property / Remedy / Applicant purchased new-build home from First Respondent / Applicant discovered flooding and engaged a plumber to investigate / Plumber found pipe was obstructed and Applicant notified First Respondent / First Respondent contracted Second Respondent to inspect and clear blockage / Flooding occurred again a month later / Applicant claimed payment for plumbing invoices / Held: insufficient evidence to prove blockages were caused by construction waste / Other waste material caused blockage further down the system / No remedy available to Applicant for costs incurred / Applicant ordered to pay Second Respondent / Claim dismissed.