Search Results

1. T Ltd v MC [2023] NZDT 614 (23 November 2023) [pdf, 188 KB]

   ...accommodation arrangement is or is not a residential tenancy or boarding house arrangement. T Ltd was given until 24 July 2023 to provide confirmation from the Tenancy Tribunal as to the nature of the arrangement. 4. T Ltd did not provide any information in the Disputes Tribunal before 24 July and the matter was set down for further hearing in front of me.1 DI advised at the second hearing that he had contacted Tenancy Services after the previous hearing and was told this was not a mat...

2. FB v TT Ltd [2022] NZDT 201 (17 July 2022) [pdf, 156 KB]

   Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2022] NZDT 201 APPLICANT FB RESPONDENT TT Ltd The Tribunal orders: TT Ltd is to pay $5,520.00 to FB by 10 August 2022. Reasons: 1. This order should be read with that dated 24/2/22. What were the relevant terms of the contract the parties entered into: both the written terms and the implied terms? Was the quote to be valid indefinitely...

3. BC v BQ [2024] NZDT 390 (5 June 2024) [pdf, 142 KB]

   ...leased to BC for her daughter to ride at a 3 day horse camp from 19-21 April. Over this period BC had the horse insured. On 23 April BQ retrieved [the horse] and claimed that she was lame. On 28 April BC decided not to proceed with the purchase and requested a refund. 2. BC claims $12,250.00 for the purchase price and the Disputes Tribunal fee. 3. BQ counter claims $8,000.00 for the reduced value of [the horse]. 4. The issues to be determined are: a. What were the terms...

4. BE v TD Ltd [2023] NZDT 317 (25 July 2023) [pdf, 190 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 317 APPLICANT BE RESPONDENT TD Ltd The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons [1] BE bought a [car] from TD Ltd, represented by Ms C. BE considers that it is defective, and claims a refund and/or compensation from TD Ltd. [2] Both parties provided written submissions, in which they set out their respective...

5. [2011] NZEmpC 115 Muldoon v Nelson Marlborough DHB supplementary [pdf, 68 KB]

   ...live applications before the Court, it, as in the case of other courts, is empowered to recall its judgments to correct slips or omissions. Failure to deal with an issue raised in the proceeding or, more particularly as in this case, to grant a form of relief claimed, is a classic example of the appropriate exercise of such a power. If the Court has overlooked doing something it ought to have addressed, then it is only just that there should be a procedure to enable that to be consi...

6. MD v D Ltd [2019] NZDT 1513 (12 August 2019) [pdf, 194 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2019] NZDT 1513 APPLICANT MD RESPONDENT EN SECOND RESPONDENT LK THIRD OR SUBSEQUENT RESPONDENT D Limited THIRD OR SUBSEQUENT RESPONDENT E Limited The Tribunal hereby orders: D Limited is to pay MD $5,615.75 on or before Monday 26 August 2019. Reasons: [1] MD purchased from D Limited (D...

7. T Ltd v BE [2024] NZDT 78 (17 January 2024) [pdf, 96 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 78 APPLICANT T Ltd RESPONDENT BE The Tribunal orders: T Ltd’s claim is dismissed. Reasons 1. BE was previously a shareholder, director and also employed by T Ltd. Relations broke down between the parties in approximately 2014/2015, which resulted in litigation in both the High Court and in the employment arena. These matters ha...

8. DC & IC v J Ltd [2024] NZDT 391 (10 June 2024) [pdf, 130 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 391 APPLICANT DC APPLICANT IC RESPONDENT J Ltd The Tribunal orders: 1. J Ltd is to remove the posts and corrugated iron fencing that were added to the original boundary fence at the front of the adjoining properties on or before 12 July 2024. 2. If the original boundary fence is damaged in the removal of the posts and corrug

9. TD v X Inc [2023] NZDT 179 (27 April 2023) [pdf, 145 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 5 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 179 APPLICANT TD RESPONDENT X Inc The Tribunal orders: The claim by TD against X Inc is dismissed. Reasons 1. TD was a member of X Inc for a number of years. TD now brings a claim against X Inc for $4000.00. 2. The issues to be resolved are: (a) Was there a contract between TD and X Inc? (b) If so, did X Inc...

10. What happens next

    ...and want to dispute the sale – you’ll need to go through the Disputes Tribunal. Disputes Tribunal If you’re making a claim against a registered trader or from a trader that meets the criteria for registration but isn’t, we can register your application when we receive it. Notifying the trader We send a copy of your claim and a notice to the trader that tells them to talk to you about the application within 14 days of receiving the notice (unless the adjudicator changes the date). The t...

    Located in:

    1. Tribunals >
    2. Motor Vehicle Disputes Tribunal