4501 items matching your search terms
IN THE WEATHERTIGHT HOMES TRIBUNAL TRI-2009-101-0064 BETWEEN ANDERSON FAMILY TRUST Claimants AND KELLY and BARRY DOYLE First Respondent AND MAX KEEN Second Respondent AND PALMERSTON NORTH CITY COUNCIL Third Respondent AND NOVACOCA LIMITED Fourth Respondent AND NOVACRETE LIMITED Fifth Respondent AND SHELDON PEPE Sixth Respondent AND GIANCARLO PEPE Seventh Respondent DETERMINATION Dated 16 December 2009 I. INTRODUCTI...
...there may be an argument that the damage was not suffered on 4 May 2007 but at some later point. In any event, the Tribunal’s jurisdiction in tort is limited to the destruction or loss of any property, or any damage or injury to any property (s 10(1)(c) of the Disputes Tribunals Act 1988). As this appears to be a claim for financial loss, not related to physical damage or loss of property, I consider that the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction in tort in respect of it. [6] I...
SUMMARY Case: Cousins v Plaster Systems Ltd & Ors – Procedural Order No. 3 File No: TRI 2008-101-000107/ DBH 00321 Court: WHT Adjudicator: C Ruthe Date of Decision: 23 January 2009 Background The claimant upgraded his house in which he designed and undertook much of the building work himself. Some of the work however was subcontracted out to sub- trades. The first respondent, Plaster Systems Ltd, is a supplier of the cladding product used on the subject dwelling....
SUMMARY Case: Carey Clan Trust v Still File No: TRI 2009-101-000022/ DBH 05711 Court: WHT Adjudicator: C Ruthe Date of Decision: 23 December 2009 Background The claimant pursued their claim against a number of parties, many of which were removed from the proceedings prior to the hearing. The remaining respondents therefore included the first and second respondents, Mr and Mrs Still, the third respondent, Tauranga City Council and the seventh respondent, Western Coatings...
...48) A2008003988 UNDER Section 19, Te Ture Whenua Maori Act 1993 IN THE MATTER OF Tahora 2AD2 and Omuriwaka BETWEEN TE RAKE TE PAIRI Applicant AND WHAKATANE DISTRICT COUNCIL Respondent Hearing: 2 April 2008 (101 OPO 119) 8 April 2008 (101 OPO 207) 5 May 2008 (102 OPO 130-143) 31 July 2008 (9 CONF 140-148) 2 June 2009 (109 OPO 233-236) 2 October 2009 (111 OPO 179-192) 8 July 2010 (14 WAR 136-154) (Heard at Opotiki) Counsel: Mr Konin...
WEATHERTIGHT HOMES TRIBUNAL CLAIM NO: TRI-2008-101-000098 BETWEEN DAVID & BRENDA AITKEN Claimant AND JAN & GABRIELLE LAUDERMILK First Respondent AND DAI JONES Second Respondent AND BRENT RULE Third Respondent AND MARLBOROUGH DISTRICT COUNCIL Fourth Respondent AND CONTOUR ROOFING (NELSON) LTD Fifth Respondent AND PHIL FROST (REMOVED) Sixth Respondent AND TONY SMALL (REMOVED) Seventh Respondent AND...
...necessary steps to prove his debt in Mr Brownie’s bankruptcy. The Authority’s confirmation of the debt may assist Mr Fuster in this regard. [10] Mr Brownie’s status as a bankrupt also affects his own right to litigate. Sections 101(1) and 102(1) of the Insolvency Act 2006 provide: 101 Status of bankrupt's property on adjudication (1) On adjudication,— (a) all property (whether in or outside New Zealand) belonging to the bankrupt or vested in the bankrupt v...
SUMMARY Case: Finlay & Anor v Baker & Ors – PROCEDURAL ORDER NO. 4 File No: TRI 2009-101-000014/ DBH 04646 Court: WHT Adjudicator: R Pitchforth Date of Decision: 3 September 2009 Background This Procedural Order deals with the removals and joinders of certain parties. In particular, the Tribunal deals with issues surrounding a claimant claiming for the leaks against one of the subcontractors (a labour-only builder). The claimant however is a builder and he and...
SUMMARY Case: Hearn & Ors v Parklane Investments Ltd & Ors – COSTS DECISION File No: TRI 2008-101-000045/ DBH 05356 Court: WHT Adjudicator: R Pitchforth Date of Decision: 23 June 2009 Background A number of parties sought costs in relation to the part of this matter that has already been determined – ie the Tribunal’s Interim Determination dated 30 April 2009. Claim for Costs The claimants sought costs against the Council on the grounds relating to the...
...was just that a compliance order be made.1 The Authority member directed the parties to mediation and observed that: [37] If after mediation matters have not resolved, a compliance order shall be issued against TVNZ ordering it comply with cl 10.1.1 of the collective agreement. [3] Mediation did not resolve matters, and the parties advised the Authority accordingly. E tū then sought a compliance order from the Authority. It appears that the Authority was not in a position to de...