Employment Court of New Zealand Te Kōti Take Mahi o Aotearoa

Contract / Fair Trading Act / Applicant contracted Respondent to organise their wedding ceremony / Paid price of $6190 / Ceremony was split over two days due to poor weather on the original date / Respondent charged an extra $2645 for the rescheduling / Applicants disputed this extra charge and did not pay / Respondents withheld the photos and videos / Applicants claim the extra charge should only be $670 / Respondent counterclaims the full payment of the invoice of $2645 / Held: Respondents entitled to $816.25 / Claim partly allowed, Applicants ordered to pay $816.25 to Respondents / Upon payment, Respondents to release all photography and videos taken over the two days.

Contract / Respondents entered into a residential building contract with Applicant for fixed price of $267,652.89 / During course of building work, variations to scope occurred for a variety of reasons / Applicant claimed remaining invoiced balance of $6723.33 / Issue was whether Respondents were liable to make further payments under the contract / Held: as contract was for a fixed price, no cost over-runs could be added except where variations were agreed and where PC sums were exceeded / Taking into account actual charges for items subject of a PC sum and total value of variations agreed to by Respondents, total amount payable by Respondents was $312,766.81 / Respondents had paid $314,562.23 to date / Insufficient detail in Applicant’s invoices to prove any additional amounts owing / Claim dismissed.

Contract Law / Consumer Guarantees Act / Fair Trading Act / Applicant arrived at Respondent’s hotel seeking a room for the night / The only available room was offered at a discounted rate of $250 instead of the usual $440 / Hotel took a bond of $50 on Applicant’s credit card / Applicant extended her stay for another night at the same discounted rate / When she wished to extend her stay again, she was advised to pay the full rate of $440 / Applicant claims compensation of $30,000 from Respondent for various reasons, including non-functional wifi, lack of dishwashing items, credit card bond under duress, and being put in unsafe situation when the hotel refused to extend her stay at a discounted rate / Held: no breach of contract by Respondent in failing to provide the room for an extended stay at a discounted rate / No duress in the $50 credit card bond / No misleading or deceptive conduct by Respondent regarding the wifi, dishwashing equipment, price, or future room availability / The I…

Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Respondent engaged Applicant to supply swimming pool materials / Applicant found at a later date some materials supplied to Respondent had not been invoiced / Applicant claimed $1,700 for unpaid materials / Respondent counterclaimed $19,297.80 for costs associated with the pool being slump in two corners due to Applicant's work / Held: Applicant provided reasonable explanation for late invoicing / Terms of contract included two lights recommended which Respondent received / Applicant provided its services with reasonable care and skill / Base prepared was fit for purpose intended / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $1,700 / Respondent's claim dismissed / Applicant’s claim allowed.

Objection withdrawn by leave of Tribunal – Land Valuation Proceedings 1948, s 19(8) – Rating Valuations Act 1998, s 36 – No costs order.

Misleading or deceptive conduct / Fair Trading Act 1986 / Respondents carried out engineering consulting work for Applicant / Subsequently, allegations were made that Joint Respondents had been fraudulently signing engineering reports over several years / Applicant claimed $2735 for fees paid / Held: joint Respondents engaged in misleading and deceptive conduct / First Respondent found personally liable due to his guilty plea for forgery / Joint Respondents ordered to pay $2645 to Applicant.

Contract / Misrepresentation / Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 / Applicants purchased a house from Respondent / Spa pool was part of purchase / When the Applicants attempted to use the spa it caused the electricity board to trip and cut power to the house / Spa pool drew more electricity than the house was supplied with / Applicant claimed $27,147.27 from Respondent, comprising of $449.22 to diagnose issue; $25,193.05 to install an additional electrical cable; $1,000.00 in legal fees; $325.00 physio costs and $180.00 for filing fee / Respondent denied liability on the basis that the spa worked when she lived at the property / Held: there was misrepresentation about the spa pool / Evidence accepted that electrical supply to the house was insufficient to run the spa /  Applicants induced into contract by misrepresentation / Spa was 15 years old so replacement value assessed to be $15,000 / Legal fees were reasonable / Applicants not awarded claimed $325.00 for physio costs for being…

Objections to valuations by Council – Rating Proceedings Act 1998, ss 36, 38 – Land value amended due to access constraints – No costs order.

Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA) / Applicant engaged First Respondent to remove asbestos from property / Applicant claimed First Respondent's work was substandard with safety issues / Applicant claimed $30,000 loss / Held: First Respondent did not carry out removal and clearance of asbestos with reasonable care and skill / Third Respondent breached guarantee afforded by CGA by not conducting Four stage clearance assessment of Class A materials and visual clearance of planned and approved removal of Class B materials with reasonable care and skill / Applicant could not remedy failure / Failure of substantial character / Applicant entitled to refund of costs paid and consequential losses / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $26,320.25 / Claim allowed.

Insurance law / Respondent hit the rear of Applicant’s vehicle at a pedestrian crossing / Applicant’s insurer paid for repair costs / Applicant claimed $6,420.80 from Respondent for cost of repairs / Held: Respondent liable for the damage to Applicant’s vehicle / Cost of repairs proven / Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $6,420.80 / Claim allowed.

[2024] NZEmpC 122 Henderson Travels Ltd (in liquidation) v Kaur (Costs Judgment of Judge K G Smith, 8 July 2024) COSTS – GUIDELINE SCALE – costs awarded.

Consumer law / Education / Consumers Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicant enrolled son with Respondent for extra English tuition /  Applicant believed that programme was inadequate and did not prepare son for exams / Son failed mock exams / Applicant claimed refund for fees paid / Held: services provided must be provided with reasonable skill and care / Goods or service must be fit for purpose / No evidence to conclude Respondent’s classes were not in accordance with curriculum / Number of reasons why son could have failed / Claim dismissed.

Contract / Respondent rebuilt Applicant's chimney that was damaged in an earthquake / Applicant was unhappy with Respondent’s work / Disputes Tribunal ordered Respondent to remove work and pay for installation of new firebox and flue / Respondent offered to resolve matter in alternative way by removing fire and flue system and paying Applicant $11,286.10 / Applicant agreed, provided that any additional costs of removal would not be at her expense / Applicant claimed $18,802.47, being cost paid to new contractor to install new fire and flue, less amount received from Respondent / Held: parties reached agreement to resolve Applicant’s original claim in alternative way to that ordered by Tribunal / Respondent breached that agreement, because entire fire and flue system was not removed as agreed, and there were additional costs Applicant had to pay / Applicant not entitled to entire cost of installation of new fire and flue system, as this was not part of alternative agreement / Respondent…