You can search by selecting a jurisdiction, a keyword (for example a name) or browse by year.

Some jurisdictions only publish a selection of decisions. Identifying details may be removed.

Search results for costs.

2940 items matching your search terms

  3. ES v UH Ltd [2017] NZDT 641 (31 October 2014) [PDF, 82 KB]

    Cancellation of contract / Applicant entered into contract with Respondent to provide wedding decorations for her wedding / Applicant paid deposit and balance of contract price / Applicant cancelled contract four days before wedding / Applicant claimed refund of total money paid less the deposit / Held: Applicant not entitled to cancel contract / no termination clause in contract / no breach of contract by Respondent / Applicant not induced to enter contract by a misrepresentation / Respondent had already begun planning and preparatory work but travel and labour costs not yet incurred / Respondent entitled to damages less the costs not incurred
  4. DM v VN Trustees Ltd [2014] 723 ( 31 October 2014) [PDF, 146 KB]

    Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / reasonable care and skill / Applicant is an architect and was engaged by Respondents to complete two jobs on a piece of land, including drawing plans and applying for resource and building consents / second job had no written contract / Applicant claims for two unpaid invoices, totalling $6,182.40 / Respondent counter-claims that Applicant’s services not performed with reasonable care and skill, resulting in additional building costs and time delays / Respondents claim $50,000 which was reduced to $15,000 to fall within Tribunal jurisdiction / Held: the two sets of building consent plans were two separate contracts / first job was completed and paid for before second job was requested and at no time was a complaint made about first job / second job took same form as first despite having no written contract / amount charged by Applicant is reasonable for the nature of the work undertaken / insufficient evidence to prove that Applicant’s plans an…
  9. AV v ZE [2014] NZDT 668 (8 October 2014) [PDF, 23 KB]

    Contract / Applicant enrolled in an immersive 34 week Maori language course but missed 23 consecutive days / Respondent terminated Applicant’s study / Applicant claimed $3,300 being the portion of her fees and the course she missed / Held: s 235 of Education Act 1989 does not apply as Applicant did not terminate the course, her contract was cancelled by Respondent / section misconstrued by Respondent / Respondent made it clear that attendance was important but do not accept that by signing the enrolment form Applicant agreed the course could be cancelled and her fees forfeited / do not accept attendance was a term of the contract / reasonable consequence of Applicant failing to attend all classes is she not graduate / Respondent wrongly cancelled contract / claim allowed, Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $3,300.
  22. AT Ltd v ZG [2014] NZDT 662 (15 September 2014) [PDF, 22 KB]

    Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Respondent entered into a sole agency agreement with Applicant and authorised up to $2,500 to be spent on marketing / proposed auction was cancelled, conditional sale fell through and Respondent attempted to cancel the contract / Applicant claimed $2,500 for marketing expenses invoiced / Held: additional marketing costs distinct and not recoverable as there was no sale / pro-rata deduction of costs claimed warranted as all marketing ceased after Respondent attempted to cancel contract / no basis for auctioneer’s fee and pre-auction meeting as service was not provided / minor issues with marketing breach of guarantee to provide services with reasonable care and skill / claim allowed (in part), Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $1,103.23.
  24. DF v VU [2014] NZDT 677 (8 September 2014) [PDF, 20 KB]

    Contract / Contractual Remedies Act 1979 / Applicant purchased a truck from Respondent / Applicant claimed $15,000 for cost of repairs to the truck, COF inspection fee, insurance and registration / Held: fact that Respondent told Applicant a much higher mileage not misleading but a false statement / case paints picture of Applicant as someone who was inexperienced and ill-prepared to operate a truck as owner-driver / Respondent had no particular obligation to direct Applicant to the appropriate pre-purchase inspection place or to explain road user charges / insufficient evidence damage existed at the time truck was sold / Applicant was not induced into entering the contract from false statement about truck’s mileage / claim dismissed.

You can try using these keywords to search the whole site.