12870 items matching your search terms
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2022] NZDT 156 APPLICANT EL RESPONDENT BN The Tribunal orders: BN is to pay $1040.00 to EL on or before 21 October 2022. Reasons 1. EL is a builder that carried out work at the property belonging to BN and his now-ex-partner DN to prepare it for sale. EL was initially approached by the real estate agent for the property and he p...
Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2023] NZDT 544 APPLICANT NC RESPONDENT NO The Tribunal orders: NO also known as [redacted] is to pay NC the sum of $4,249.50 immediately. Reasons The telephone hearing for this application was held 11 September 2023 at 9.15am. The respondent NO had been notified of the hearing but failed to atten...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2023] NZDT 623 APPLICANT HM RESPONDENT XD SECOND RESPONDENT KT The Tribunal orders: 1. XD and KT must return E to HM by 4pm on 4 December 2023 at a time and place that is reasonably agreed by all parties. 2. If E is not returned to HM in accordance with paragraph 1 above, XD and KT must pay HM $2,000.00 by 4pm on 11 December 2023. R...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2021] NZDT 1694 APPLICANT EF RESPONDENT UM The Tribunal orders: UM is to pay $30,000.00 to EF on or before Friday 29 October 2021. Reasons: 1. In May 2019, EF and UM signed an Agreement to Purchase. The header page named “[Company 1] or nominee company” and “EF or nominee” as the parties. The agreement set out “act...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2022] NZDT 269 APPLICANT KL APPLICANT KC RESPONDENT EJ Ltd The Tribunal orders: EJ Ltd must pay KL and KC $4,262.00 by 4pm on 24 January 2023. Reasons: 1. The applicants ordered a television unit from the respondent on 13 January 2022 and paid a 50% deposit of $4,262.00. The estimated delivery time for the unit was 1...
IN THE DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2014] NZDT 723 BETWEEN DM APPLICANT AND VN TRUSTEES LIMITED RESPONDENT Date of Order: 31 October 2014 Referee: Referee Perfect ORDER OF THE DISPUTES TRIBUNAL The Tribunal hereby orders that VN Trustees Limited as trustee of AA is to pay the sum of $6,182.40 directly to DM trading as ABC on or before 28 November 2014 and the counter claim is dismissed. Facts [1] DM, trading as ABC, was engaged by VN T...
Page 1 of 2 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) RESULT OF APPLICATION FOR REHEARING [2023] NZDT 557 APPLICANT person or organisation making the original claim ED RESPONDENT person or organisation originally claimed against MA Result of application for rehearing: Rehearing Granted The Order of 18 April 2023 is set aside. In due course the parties will be advised of the date and time of the new hearing. Reasons for decision: 1...
.................................................................................................................................. 3 Grounds for Review ................................................................................................................. 4 APPLICATIONS FOR REVIEW ................................................................................................ 5 Applications ...............................................................................................
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 6 APPLICANT N Ltd RESPONDENT NQ The Tribunal orders: NQ is to pay N Ltd the sum of $990.15 by no later than 15 March 2024. Reasons: 1. The matter arises from NQ’s shopping trolley (full of groceries) hitting a parked car owned by N Ltd in a supermarket car park. 2. The respondent has been amended to reflect that NQ should be...
...and he did not know about it. The issue in relation to the provision of false documents is whether the Tribunal can uphold such a complaint which failed at trial in a prosecution. [3] It is also alleged Mr Wong entered information onto a blank application form already signed by a client, before filing the application with Immigration New Zealand. Mr Wong denies doing so, contrary to an admission he made to the Authority. He declined to attend the Tribunal’s hearing of the com...