Search Results

1. Mitchell v Corrections [2023] NZHRRT 18 [pdf, 204 KB]

   ...assessment to Police under cover of a letter dated 10 December 2014. [2] A few months later in the course of a pre-trial hearing regarding Ms Mitchell’s criminal charges, a request was made by the Police to Corrections for Prisoner Complaint (PC01) forms created by Ms Mitchell. [3] On 31 August 2015 under cover of an email of the same date, Kelly Puohotaua, the acting Prison Manager for Auckland Regional Women’s Corrections Facility (ARWCF), sent 47 pages of Ms Mitchell’s PC01...

2. KM v LK [2023] NZDT 255 (28 June 2023) [pdf, 96 KB]

   ...something prevented the proper decision from being made: for example, the relevant information was not available at the time. If you wish to apply for a rehearing, you can apply online, download a form from the Disputes Tribunal website or obtain an application form from any Tribunal office. The application must be lodged within 20 working days of the decision having been made. If you are applying outside of the 20 working day timeframe, you must also fill out an Application for Reheari...

3. [2014] NZEmpC 148 Ngawharau v Porirua Whanau Centre [pdf, 53 KB]

   ...directions issued by the Authority or the Court”. Some examples were provided. [6] These are serious allegations. Normally when the Court is faced with a claim that a litigant has not cooperated with the Authority’s investigation, it will request what is known as a good faith report pursuant to s 181(1) of the Employment Relations Act 2000 (the Act). Section 181(2) of the Act, however, provides that the Court may request a Good Faith Report only where it is apparent from the...

4. QN v C Ltd [2022] NZDT 209 (22 May 2022) [pdf, 216 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 5 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2022] NZDT 209 APPLICANT QN RESPONDENT C Ltd The Tribunal orders: C Ltd is to pay directly to QN the sum of $729.00 on or before 23 November 2021. Summary of Reasons: [1] The hearing was convened by teleconference. As a result of the COVID-19 restrictions, the Tribunal was unable to convene a hearing in person. Both parties...

5. EN & MN v U Ltd [2022] NZDT 284 (7 October 2022).pdf [pdf, 197 KB]

   ...the cracked benchtop with the same sort. The new benchtop does not match the remaining benchtop. The applicants are claiming for the cost of replacing the cracked bench top and the cost of a new matching bench top. 6. It was not disputed that a former company called S produced the original benchtop and that it was 6mm to 8 mm thick with a backing board. It was a benchtop veneer as an alternative to expensive benchtops which are traditionally imported from [Country]. 7. The benchtop...

6. AAH v ZZT [2012] NZDT 39 (15 October 2012) [pdf, 51 KB]

   IN THE DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2012] NZDT 39 BETWEEN AAH APPLICANT AND ZZT RESPONDENT Date of Order: 15 October 2012 Referee: Referee Rossiter ORDER OF THE DISPUTES TRIBUNAL The Tribunal hereby orders that the application be struck out. Facts [1] The Applicant is the manufacturer of a product that it wishes and intends to be used as an additive to grapes. The purpose of the p...

7. ET v MC & DC [2022] NZDT 119 (5 August 2022) [pdf, 200 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court - [2022] NZDT 119 APPLICANT ET RESPONDENT MC SECOND RESPONDENT DC The Tribunal orders: The claim by ET is struck out. With respect to the counterclaim by MC and DC, ET is to pay $560.00 to MC and DC by the 5th September 2022. Reasons The claim by ET 1. ET claims from MC and DC for a contribution of $1248.00 tow...

8. TI v K Ltd [2024] NZDT 457 (24 May 2024) [pdf, 162 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 2 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 457 APPLICANT TI RESPONDENT K Ltd The Tribunal orders: The claim is withdrawn. Reasons: 1. After receiving an explanation and clarification of K Ltd’s actions from K Ltd (as supported by the written decision of the [Financial Institution] dated 11/10/23) TI choose to withdraw his claim. 2. In short, K Ltd was of the opinion that althoug...

9. The Māori Trustee v Greening – Pirikotahi 9A2, 9B1, 9B2A and 9B2C2 (2013) 60 Taitokerau MB 78 (60 TTK 78) [pdf, 71 KB]

   ...Judgment: 06 June 2013 RESERVED JUDGMENT OF JUDGE D J AMBLER 60 Taitokerau MB 79 Introduction [1] This decision addresses whether the second respondent, Rio Greening, is entitled to pursue a counter-claim against the Māori Trustee after the Māori Trustee has withdrawn his application. Background [2] The Māori Trustee brought two applications before the Court. Although the two applications proceeded in tandem, this decision is onl...

10. TE & TT v ST [2023] NZDT 54 (26 January 2023).pdf [pdf, 204 KB]

    ...District Court [2023] NZDT 54 APPLICANT TE APPLICANT TT RESPONDENT ST The Tribunal orders: The claim by TE and TT against ST is struck out for want of jurisdiction. Reasons 1. The parents of TE and TT (the applicants) died “intestate”. The applicants now bring a claim against ST who is their sibling (the respondent) for funeral costs for their mother in the sum of $11,870.00. 2. The issues to be resolved are: (a) Does the Disputes Tribuna...