Search Results

1. GN & GO v LQ Ltd Power Company U [2022] NZDT 121 (24 August 2022) [pdf, 219 KB]

   ...District Court - [2022] NZDT 121 APPLICANT GN APPLICANT GO RESPONDENT LQ Ltd SECOND RESPONDENT Power Company U The Tribunal orders: 1. LQ Ltd to pay GN and GO $2,965.04 by 20 September 2022. 2. The Applicants claim against Power Company U is not proven and therefore dismissed. Reasons. The claim 1. The Applicants purchased a property from LQ Ltd on the 16 May 2021 pursuant to Agreement for Sale and Purchase dated 2 July 2020. When the...

2. Dean v Ministry of Social Development (Strike-Out) [2024] NZHRRT 15 [pdf, 218 KB]

   1 DECISION OF TRIBUNAL STRIKING-OUT CLAIM1 [1] Mr Dean has brought a claim to the Tribunal, alleging discrimination by the Ministry of Social Development (Ministry) in breach of Part 1A of the Human Rights Act 1993 (HRA). [2] The defendants have made application under section 115A of the HRA to strike out Mr Dean’s proceeding on the grounds that it discloses no reasonable cause of action, is 1 This decision is to be cited as Dean v Ministry of Social Development (Strike...

3. [2021] NZACC 141 – LM v ACC (20 September 2021) [pdf, 170 KB]

   ...COURT AT WELLINGTON I TE KŌTI-Ā-ROHE KI TE WHANGANUI-A-TARA [2021] NZACC 141 ACR 191/18 ACR 273/19 UNDER THE ACCIDENT COMPENSATION ACT 2001 IN THE MATTER OF AN APPEAL UNDER SECTION 162 OF THE ACT BETWEEN L M Applicant AND ACCIDENT COMPENSATION CORPORATION Respondent Hearing: On the Papers Judgment: 20 September 2021 ___________________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT OF JUDGE D CLARK [Lea...

4. Lawson v Intended Defendant (No. 2) (Extension of time to commence proceedings) [2023] NZHRRT 33 [pdf, 193 KB]

   ...HEARING: Heard on the papers DATE OF DECISION: 13 October 2023 DECISION OF DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON REJECTING APPLICATION TO EXTEND TIME TO COMMENCE PROCEEDINGS1 [1] Miss Lawson alleges that the Intended Defendant failed to respond to her requests for access to her personal information. Her claim in the Tribunal was, however, filed outside the six-month time period prescribed by the Privacy Act 2020 (PA). [2] That six-month time period runs from the date the Privacy Co...

5. IM v IS [2024] NZDT 208 (12 March 2024) [pdf, 96 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 208 APPLICANT IM RESPONDENT IS The Tribunal orders: IM’s claim against IS is struck out. Reasons 1. Between 2018 and 2020, IM was employed by IS’s company TD Ltd as a Safety Manager. TD Ltd stopped trading in February 2020. IM alleges that IS transferred the titles of 3 of TD Ltd’s company vehicles into his own name....

6. TS v BE [2024] NZDT 667 (30 July 2024) [pdf, 113 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 667 APPLICANT TS RESPONDENT BE The Tribunal orders: The claim is struck out. Reasons: 1. TS owns one of three units next-door to BE’s property at [Address]. Near part of the common boundary but predominantly on BE’s land, there is an old concrete block retaining wall that is leaning towards TS’s property. Near the other third of the b...

7. UB v KL [2020] NZDT 1372 (13 November 2020) [pdf, 170 KB]

   (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2020] NZDT 1372 APPLICANT UB RESPONDENT KL The Tribunal orders: KL is to pay UB the amount of $907.44 on or before 4 December 2020. Reasons 1. In June 2020 KL rented out a semi-self-contained studio on her property to UB that had its own kitchen facilities and was semi-furnished. They agreed to a rental amount of $200.00 per week and UB paid $900.00, being

8. ABG v ZYW [2011] NZDT 88 (5 September 2011) [pdf, 72 KB]

   IN THE DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2011] NZDT 88 BETWEEN ABG APPLICANT AND ZYW RESPONDENT Date of Order: 5 September 2011 Referee: Referee A Davidson ORDER OF THE DISPUTES TRIBUNAL The Tribunal hereby orders that the Applicant’s claim is struck out as it does not fall within the jurisdiction of the Disputes Tribunal. Law [1] The Disputes Tribunal’s jurisdiction is set out in s 10(1)...

9. TO & TA v MB [2023] NZDT 232 (5 May 2023) [pdf, 106 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 232 APPLICANT TO APPLICANT TA RESPONDENT MB The Tribunal orders: MB is to pay TO the sum of $2,779.54 and TA the sum of $640.00 on or before 2 June 2023. Reasons: 1. TO and TA purchased tickets from MB, to fly from [City 1] to [City 2], via [Country 1]. Their flight between [Country 1] and [Country 2] was cancell...

10. HT v CJ Ltd [2019] NZDT 1508 (2 October 2019) [pdf, 181 KB]

    CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2019] NZDT 1508 APPLICANT HT RESPONDENT CJ Limited t/a B The Tribunal hereby orders: 1. TE and LL are removed as respondents, and the respondent is changed to CJ Limited at the request of the parties. 2. CJ Limited is to pay the sum of $3,039.05 to HT on or before Wednesday 16 October 2019. Reasons: 1. On 26 November...