Employment Court of New Zealand Te Kōti Take Mahi o Aotearoa

Contract / Applicant arranged for Respondent to provide a quotation for house painting / Respondent sent a quote of $21,084.10 / Respondent requested a 50 percent deposit of quoted price to secure booking / Applicant paid deposit / Later, Applicant cancelled contract as she was concerned the Respondent was going to breach the contract and keep deposit / Applicant claimed refund of deposit / Held: no discussion or agreement regarding what would happen to deposit if contract was cancelled / Applicant pre-empted a potential breach of contract by Respondent / No clear evidence Respondent was going to breach the contract / Applicant not entitled to cancel contract or claim deposit refund / Outside hearing process, Applicant refunded Respondent $5,000.00, almost 50 percent of deposit / Claim resolved.

Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Respondent requested applicant’s services regarding renovation of her home / Fixed price for work not set / House design work included design and drafting plans, writing specifications, arranging Council files, site measure, engaging an architect and meeting with applicant / Applicant seeks payment / Outcome: respondent liable to pay invoices and council fees / Not proved that applicant breached CGA / Outcome: claim allowed, respondent to pay applicant $10,795.02 by 10 November 2023

Contract / Applicant engaged Respondent as property manager for rental property / Applicant terminated contract after multiple significant water leaks occurred / Applicant claimed Respondent provided incorrect advice that leaks had been resolved, failed to address leaks in timely manner, and had failed to obtain consent for initial plumbing work / Applicant claimed $4985.57: $3290.61 in water charges, $971.04 refund of initial plumbing invoice, and $500.00 compensation for time resolving issues / Held: Respondent did not breach contract for arranging initial plumbing work / However, Respondent’s property manager was liable for making unwarranted assumption after seeing water maintenance trucks that water main issue had been resolved / Respondent must pay Applicant $2472.38 for excess water bills resulting from breach / Applicant not entitled to additional damages / Claim allowed.

Weekly compensation / calculation of earnings as a self-employed person - s 100, s 14, Schedule 1, Part 2, CL 31,32 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Appeal of decision after Corporation had deducted portion of loan interests costs from income received from investment. Court finds previous decisions correct in treatment of interest treated as an expense related to income from investment and correctly calculated earnings for purpose of determining weekly compensation.

Contract / Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Respondent provided services of an electrician to applicant / Applicant unhappy with work and amount charged / Applicant has not paid the full invoice / Held: work agreed on was for cables to be laid from house to studio in garden / Although no full price was agreed, the components of pricing were agreed before the job was booked / No evidence price was unreasonable / Outcome: applicant must pay respondent $1,012.00

Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 / Applicant took vehicle to Respondent for repair of engine light / Respondent checked and replaced spark plugs, coils and other parts / Car broke down after overheating on the way home / Applicant seeking refund, rental car costs and petrol costs / Whether repairs done with reasonable skill and care / Held: on the balance of probabilities the issues with the car overheating were more likely to be existing / Issue not related to work carried out by Respondent / Claim dismissed

Contract / Building Act 2004 / Applicants purchased duplex house from first owner who bought it new from respondent / Applicants claim roofing failed within 5 years of being built / Also claim it is not fit for purpose, there was leak over sliding door and cracks in gib / Applicant’s claim $16,771.50 for repair and inspection report costs, 5 weeks and 4 days lost rental, administration time and overheads, estimated additional repairs / Held: roofing not reasonably fit for purpose / Applicants entitled to some of what they claim as remedy / Outcome: claim allowed, respondent to pay applicants $5953.39

Contract / Contract for applicant to supply respondents with materials required to build log house / Applicant claims sum comprised of two invoices / First for materials and labour / Second for LVL beams / Respondents counterclaim for payment relating to shipping and import costs / Held: respondents must pay first invoice, no prejudice by timing of invoice / Respondents not obliged to pay second invoice, use of LVL not authorised / Counter claim dismissed, was made reasonably clear respondents would need to pay for importing and shipping materials / Outcome: claim allowed, respondents to pay applicant $3,904.38

Contract / Business entered into a written storage agreement with Applicant to pay monthly rent to store belongings / When Respondent purchased the business, its account was in arrears of $938.92 / Respondent continued to pay monthly rental and arrears remained / Applicant subsequently notified Respondent of monthly rent increases twice / Respondent failed to increase rent payments resulting in further arrears / Parties signed agreement allowing Respondent to remove their goods if they agreed to pay the arrears of $4305.05 at $200 per week / Agreement stated interest charges of 15% would be waived if Respondent paid agreed arrears / Respondent paid only $525.00, breaching  agreement / Applicant claimed remaining $3780.05 plus interest of $2409.00 over entire period arrears were owing / Held: Respondent must pay Applicant $5701.05, $1921.00 (interest), $3780.05 (arrears) / Claim allowed.

09.10.2023 | Judge D H Stone | Sections 19 and 67, Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993 | Costs

[2023] NZEmpC 175 Carrington Resort Jade LP v Maheno (Interlocutory Judgment (No 3) of Judge Kathryn Beck, 6 October 2023) GOOD FAITH REPORT – employer obstructed Authority’s investigation – Court proceedings to be subject to strict timetabling orders – employer’s obstruction to attract costs consequences.

[2023] NZEmpC 169 BDX v PZY (Interlocutory Judgment of Judge M S King, 4 October 2023) STAY – unsuccessful application for stay of execution – SECURITY FOR COSTS – unsuccessful application for security for costs – NON-PUBLICATION – interim non-publication orders made.

Appeal / licensee failed to disclose prior burglaries and ownership of property in writing / Committee found unsatisfactory conduct / purchasers claim compensation for expenses incurred in securing property / licensee challenges costs award / Real Estate Agents Act 2008, s931f, s111, s136 / Professional Rules 2012, r6.4 / HELD / new compensation provisions of Act do not apply as conduct occurred prior to new provisions taking effect / Committee cannot award broad compensation under guise of relief from rectification / tortious measure of damages applicable, rather than expectation damages / purchasers’ claim for compensation failed due to lack of valuation evidence and as expense of securing property not causally connected to licensee’s conduct / costs challenge failed as licensee withdrew appeal against penalty, purchasers’ appeals of Committee’s liability and penalty decisions not hopeless, and no legal basis to stay costs award / appeal dismissed, Committee’s decision confirmed