According to Disputes Tribunal referee Leonie Thompson, a farmer missed out on a $4432 claim for damaged hay bale wrapping after a rally car crashed through his fence in November 2023. The tribunal ruled that the farmer’s own negligence in setting up a faulty temporary electric fence broke the legal chain of causation, even though the rally organiser breached an initial agreement to repair the property.
How a November 2023 Car Rally Triggered a Property Dispute
The sequence of events began during a car rally in November 2023, according to tribunal findings reported by NZME Open Justice reporter Tracy Neal. A driver crashed and knocked over two fences owned by the farmer. This occurred after the local council granted permission to close public roads for the course and all affected landowners received prior notification, Thompson said.
The event organiser accepted full responsibility for damage incurred by any participating driver. Following the crash, the organiser explicitly agreed to repair the broken fences. However, that agreement fell through. Although the organiser hired a contractor to complete the work, the repairs never happened, and the company failed to follow up on the missing invoice, according to the tribunal decision.
Contract Breach Versus Contributory Negligence
Under contract law, the rally organiser clearly breached the agreement to fix the fence, Thompson noted. While the company may have genuinely believed the contractor finished the job, it should have checked when no invoice arrived. Despite this breach, the farmer could not recover $4432 for the re-wrapping of hay bales damaged further down the road.
Several months after the rally, the farmer needed to use the paddock and installed a temporary electric fence. That temporary fix failed, allowing cattle to escape and damage plastic wrapping on baleage on another part of the property. The farmer eventually arranged permanent repairs himself, and the organiser reimbursed those direct costs.
Why the Disputes Tribunal Dismissed the Baleage Claim
Thompson upheld the rally organiser’s defense of contributory negligence. The tribunal found that any temporary fence should have contained the livestock securely, and it could not have been reasonably foreseen that releasing cattle into an insecure field would lead to damage down the road.
“In making this finding I have considered that it is unknown why the hotwire failed,” Thompson said, as reported by NZME. “However, as it was [the farmer] who implemented this temporary solution it is appropriate that it bears the responsibility for it failing.” Because the farmer failed to take reasonable steps to minimise the loss through a secure temporary enclosure, the $4432 claim was dismissed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Who was responsible for the initial fence damage?
The rally organiser took responsibility for damage caused by drivers during the November 2023 event and agreed to arrange repairs, according to tribunal referee Leonie Thompson.
Why did the farmer’s claim fail at the Disputes Tribunal?
The tribunal ruled that the farmer was contributorily negligent because his temporary electric fence failed to contain the cattle, and the resulting damage to hay bale wrapping down the road was not reasonably foreseeable by the organiser.
How much money was the farmer claiming?
The farmer claimed $4432 to cover the cost of having hay bales re-wrapped in plastic after escaping cattle damaged the original wrapping.
Stay Informed on Legal Decisions
Join the conversation by leaving a comment below or exploring more case breakdowns from our legal affairs section.