12515 items matching your search terms
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 2 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 447 APPLICANT OC RESPONDENT OQ Limited APPLICANT'S INSURER [Insurance company] The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons: 1. OC contracted OQ Ltd on 27 December 2022 to collect and transport a boat and trailer from [City 1] to [City 2] for a prepaid fee of $1,400.00. 2. OQ...
...was adjudicated bankrupt. 3. The Insolvency Act 2006 relevantly provides: 76 Effect of adjudication on court proceedings (1) On adjudication, all proceedings to recover any debt provable in the bankruptcy are halted. (2) However, on the application by any creditor or other person interested in the bankruptcy, the court may allow proceedings that had already begun before the date of adjudication to continue on the terms and conditions that the court thinks appropriate. 4. I...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 2 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2022] NZDT 14 APPLICANT BL RESPONDENT BU Ltd The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reason 1. On 17 July 29021 BL’s car was towed by BU Ltd. To recover the car BL paid $429.24. He believes the amount charged was unreasonable and there was no signage that his car was parked on private property or in a tow away zone. He...
Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2023] NZDT 590 APPLICANT person or organisation making the original claim ZA as trustee for HG Trust RESPONDENT person or organisation originally claimed against LM Limited Result of application for rehearing: Rehearing Refused The Order 14 August 2023 of stands. Reasons for decision: 1. TC appeared as a presentative of LM Ltd. 2. TC is seeking...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 222 APPLICANT ZM RESPONDENT TU THIRD OR SUBSEQUENT RESPONDENT D Ltd RESPONDENT INSURER (if applicable) G Ltd The Tribunal orders: 1. The claim is dismissed. 2. The counter-claim is dismissed. Reasons: 1. On 12 January 2023, there was a collision on [road] near a corner between the [car] drive...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 2 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2023] NZDT 575 APPLICANT TC RESPONDENT TB The Tribunal orders: TC is to pay TB the amount of $195.50 on or before 5 December 2023. Reason 1. The dispute is over collection and installation of a television TB was engaged to do for TC and whether the work was completed. TC is claiming $209.37 for her time and travel to deal with this; TB is claimin...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2023] NZDT 554 APPLICANT L Foundation RESPONDENT OS The Tribunal orders: 1. The claim for the return of two horses is struck out. 2. The hearing is adjourned. The parties will be notified of the date and time of the new hearing. 3. The parties may submit any additional evidence by email to [the Disputes Tribunal] using reference [file nu...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 604 APPLICANT GB RESPONDENT B Ltd SECOND RESPONDENT M Ltd THIRD OR SUBSEQUENT RESPONDENT PD The Tribunal orders: 1. B Ltd and PD, jointly and severally are to pay GB the sum of $6,637.96 on or before 14 June 2024. 2. The counter claim is dismissed. Reasons: 1. GB was driving on [Road], and PD, who...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2022] NZDT 189 APPLICANT UO RESPONDENT HE The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons: 1. The Applicant purchased a second-hand washing machine from the Respondent via Trade Me on 19 May 2022 for $306.10 and collected the machine on 28 May 2022. 2. The Applicant used the machine regularly without issue until 29...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2023] NZDT 724 APPLICANT NT RESPONDENT T Ltd SECOND RESPONDENT L Ltd The Tribunal orders: 1. L Ltd is added as a respondent to this claim. 2. The claim is dismissed. Reasons: 1. NT parked his car in a carpark owned and operated by L Ltd. As the ticketing machine was broken, NT needed to pay for his parking through the parking app,...