12493 items matching your search terms
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2023] NZDT 774 APPLICANT TM RESPONDENT BC Limited The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons: 1. TM and GH, representing BC Limited (“BC”) both attended the hearing by teleconference. 2. TM took his vehicle to BC for repair as there were issues with its engine. He said BC agreed to provide a full engine replacem...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2023] NZDT 693 APPLICANT OT RESPONDENT KC SECOND RESPONDENT ZX The Tribunal orders: 1. ZX is joined as a respondent. 2. The claim against KC is struck out. 3. ZX is to pay OT $330.00 on or before 2 January 2024. Reasons Introduction 1. In September 2023, OT won a [camera] from [an online] auction being run by user identification [userna...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2019] NZDT 1387 APPLICANT JC RESPONDENT KB The Tribunal hereby orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons 1. During the course of a de facto relationship of some ten months duration, Ms C says that she loaned Mr B money on numerous occasions with an agreement that he would repay her each pay day. At the end of their relationship...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2023] NZDT 741 APPLICANT B Ltd RESPONDENT DT The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons: 1. In June 2023 TI, DT’s ex-husband uplifted a courtesy car from B Ltd for the use of their daughter, NB, while DT’s car was being repaired. The car being repaired had been bought by DT for their daughter from B Ltd. 2. On 15 June 2023 NB...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 560 APPLICANT D Ltd RESPONDENT IB The Tribunal orders: 1. IB is to pay D Ltd $11516.91 on or before 30 August 2024. 2. Payment is to be made by way of direct credit to account number [redacted]. Reasons: 1. IB, through her solicitor, engaged D Ltd to provide a valuation of stock owned by IB and her ex- husband to assist in the f...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 158 APPLICANT BU RESPONDENT B Ltd The Tribunal orders: 1. The claim is dismissed. Reasons: 2. BU purchased a [car] from B Ltd for $5,250.00. He understood the car was registered as a seven seater car. BU has a large family and was in the market to buy a car that could fit his family. After he purchased the car, he d...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 371 APPLICANT D Ltd RESPONDENT G Ltd The Tribunal orders: G Ltd is to pay D Ltd $19,662.67 on or before 25 May 2023. Reasons 1. D Ltd supplied electricity to G Ltd as the company is now called, (previously GH Ltd), under D Ltd’s terms and conditions. In about 2020 and 2021, D Ltd discovered that there had been p...
1 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 399 APPLICANT OT RESPONDENT F Ltd The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons: 1. In 2020 OT purchased a used [performance car] from [dealership] in [City 1]. After travelling 8,000kms and within the three year warranty period, he discovered the water pump was leaking. He took the vehicle to BN, the [dealer] in [City 2], who could not find any...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2022] NZDT 176 APPLICANT AM RESPONDENT BN The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons 1. Mr AM purchased a [car] in March 2021 on GN from a person named EI, by swapping it for a vehicle to the value of $10,000.00 and has since spent $6,000.00 on repairs and upgrades. On 3 May 2022 the [...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2022] NZDT 13 APPLICANT LT RESPONDENT NL The Tribunal orders: NL is to pay LT the amount of $30,000 on or before 30 May 2022. Reason 1. The dispute concerns $30,000 belonging to LT which was in the possession of NL and which LT wishes to be returned. 2. LT and NL have known each other for many years having been in busine...