This is the best summary I could come up with:
A New Zealand woman has taken her long-term boyfriend to a disputes tribunal for breaching a “verbal contract” by failing to take her to the airport, resulting in her missing a flight to a concert and forcing her to delay her travel by one day.
The woman told New Zealand’s disputes tribunal that she had been in a relationship with the man for six and a half years until the disagreement arose.
According to an order from the tribunal, released on Thursday with names redacted, the woman had arranged to attend a concert with some friends.
But the tribunal referee Krysia Cowie said for an agreement to be enforceable there needed to be an intention to create a “legally binding relationship”.
“Partners, friends and colleagues make social arrangements, but it is unlikely they can be legally enforced unless the parties perform some act that demonstrates an intention that they will be bound by their promises,” she wrote.
“The parties did not take any steps to show an intention to take the agreement out of a promise made between friends and to create legally binding consequences,” she wrote.
The original article contains 531 words, the summary contains 187 words. Saved 65%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
I had a partner a bit like that many years ago. We’re also not together anymore.
This has been posted here already.
It’s still funny
I know, that’s why I already posted it.
You posted it to NZ Off Topic, which may have been accidental. But from what I can see it hasn’t been posted in !newzealand@lemmy.nz until now.
(Edit to add link to the other post which has more discussion in case people want to check it out: https://lemmy.nz/post/11586877)
I think it’s okay to have more than one article about a topic?
Tbf your post was an RNZ article by a different journalist. I read both of them in a spirit of “wtf there must be more to this” and this one has slightly different detail about their previous holiday and him being a no-show at the hearing.
It’s quite funny he didn’t even show up and still won.
Kind of a testament to how wrong she was.
Must have been a bit weird for the judge just sitting there with this woman and hearing all these grievances and then being the one to break it to her that this is not how life works!
