Search Results

1. Body Corporate 310620 113 Glenmore Street [2011] NZWHT Auckland 62 [pdf, 92 KB]

   ...ELIGIBILITY DECISION OF THE CHAIR OF THE WEATHERTIGHT HOMES TRIBUNAL The Claim [1] Body Corporate 310620 is the representative of the owners of a two unit complex at Glenmore Street, Kelburn. On 4 July 2011 they filed an application for an assessor’s report with the Department of Building and Housing. The chief executive concluded that the claim was not an eligible claim because it was not filed within ten years of when the complex was built. [2] The...

2. IX v HO [2024] NZDT 90 (28 February 2024) [pdf, 98 KB]

   ...agreement, and he was fully paid up in rent when he left. 7. Clause 6 also provides that “[I]f the tenant seeks an early termination, the tenant is responsible for finding a new tenant to complete the term of the fixed lease rental agreement”. HO claimed in messages with IX that because no tenant had been found, HO was entitled to keep the bond to cover the rent in the weeks after IX left. 8. However I do not accept that this is correct. The obligation on IX was clear, but he...

3. Beattie v Porirua City Council [2010] NZWHT Wellington 14 [pdf, 120 KB]

   ...respondents. [2] Mr Galloway said his client was not seeking removal in the light of the decision of the High Court in Fenton v Building Code Consultants Ltd HC Auckland, CIV-2009-404-6348, 15 March 2010. Ms Donaldson did not wish to pursue a removal application as it was unlikely to succeed because of the requirement for the Tribunal to treat factual allegations in pleadings as being correct at the removal/strike out stage. [3] The High Court in Fenton held that s 112 and...

4. KW v T Ltd [2024] NZDT 195 (28 March 2024) [pdf, 203 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 195 APPLICANT KW RESPONDENT T Ltd The Tribunal orders: T Ltd is to pay KW $609.00 within 30 days of the date of this order. Reasons: 1. In September 2020, T Ltd supplied and installed a gate automation system at KW’s property. In September 2021, there was an issue with the gate not working. KW called T Ltd, who visited...

5. UL v TS [2024] NZDT 302 (27 March 2024) [pdf, 131 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 302 APPLICANT UL RESPONDENT TS APPLICANT'S INSURER (if applicable) B Ltd The Tribunal orders: 1. B Ltd is added as a party to the claim. 2. The claim is dismissed. Reasons: 1. UL visited TS’s property as a prospective tenant. He parked on a gravel car park next to the lawn. 2. TS was mowing the lawn. S...

6. NB v U Ltd [2023] NZDT 310 (9 June 2023) [pdf, 211 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 310 APPLICANT NB RESPONDENT U Ltd The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons 1. NB purchased a car from U Ltd on 24 January 2023. A week after purchase, the car was broken into and the left front window smashed for entry. 2. After the break-in, the electric control for the left-front window would not...

7. Pillay v New Zealand Transport Agency [2021] NZHRRT 13 [pdf, 179 KB]

   ...NZTA has interfered with his privacy. [3] NZTA disputes that there has been any interference with Mr Pillay’s privacy and claims immunity in respect of both the disclosures. BACKGROUND [4] In November 2014 Mr Pillay imported the car and requested advice and repair from Mr Barlass, a NZTA accredited repair certifier. Mr Barlass worked with Bute Collision Repairs to have the repairs done for Mr Pillay. The car was then presented to VTNZ for compliance certification in accordance...

8. CoCA Fixed Fees Schedule Jul 2020 [pdf, 173 KB]

   ...Taking instructions, attending the client • Preparing application for legal aid • Attempting to contact the client • Closing the file • Reporting to client • Reporting to and invoicing Ministry of Justice Note: This fee can only be claimed where initial instructions are not carried through and the file is closed prior to the completion of stage one of any proceedings. It cannot be claimed in conjunction with any other schedule. Application(s)/Order(s) Activity...

9. UI & II v D Ltd [2023] NZDT 34 (31 January 2023) [pdf, 104 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 34 APPLICANT UI and II RESPONDENT D Ltd The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons 1. In late 2020 UI and II took their [car] to D Ltd because there was a leak between the convertible roof and the windscreen. UI and II say that they had read online that the seals can open up a bit and to ask the de...

10. Establishment of Canterbury Earthquakes Insurance Tribunal [pdf, 257 KB]

    ...Insurance Tribunal (“the Tribunal”), as committed to in the Labour Party’s 2017 election manifesto, to provide an alternative pathway for claimants, the Earthquake Commission (EQC) and insurers to resolve outstanding earthquake-related insurance claims. Executive Summary 2 The 2010 and 2011 Canterbury earthquakes generated insurance claims in relation to over 167,677 residential properties. 98% of these claims have settled. However, seven years on, 2% of claims remain unresolve...