12509 items matching your search terms
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 280 APPLICANT EE RESPONDENT H Ltd The Tribunal orders: H Ltd is to pay the sum of $185.14 to EE by no later than 25 August 2023. Reasons: 1. EE purchased second hand hearing aids and a charger unit from a person in [City]. When the items were approximately 18 months old, faults developed in both the hear...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2023] NZDT 640 APPLICANT CN RESPONDENT NK The Tribunal orders: NK is ordered to pay CN the sum of $2,504.59. Payment of this sum is ordered no later than 6 December 2023. Reasons: 1) In December 2022 the applicant bought a motorhome from the respondent. This was advertised on [online] marketplace. The price paid was $83,000.00....
...1993 to determine only whether there has been unlawful discrimination on one or more of the grounds listed in s 21 of that Act. The Tribunal has no jurisdiction in relation to complaints that the Ministry failed to properly process or consider an application for financial assistance. That is the function of the Social 2 Security Appeal Authority. Mr Meek did in fact commence a review under the Social Security Act of the decision in issue in this case but that review was subsequen...
...now seeks a refund of the $1,837.35 paid to her. 2. S Ltd’s claim was originally filed against NG, but N Ltd was joined as second respondent at the previous hearing since its name was used on the invoices. However, N Ltd’s representative ND informed the Tribunal and confirmed in the hearing that NG has no connection with that company and is unknown to ND. NG was the director of a company named NGD Ltd that was removed from the Companies Register in 2021. The correct respondent is the...
Claim No: 1092 Under the Weathertight Homes Resolution Services Act 2002 In the matter of an adjudication claim Between Auckland City Council (as assignee) Claimant And David Irwin First respondent And Paterson Cullen Irwin Limited Second respondent And Stuart Brentnall Third respondent And S J Brentnall Limited Fourth respondent And Carl Ruffels Fifth respondent And Auckland City Council Sixth respondent...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 229 APPLICANT HF Ltd RESPONDENT Q Ltd The Tribunal orders: HF Ltd is to pay Q Ltd $5,982.79 by no later than 8th April 2024. Q Ltd is to supply replacement panels to HF Ltd within 10 working days from the receipt of payment. Reasons 1. The Applicant contracted the Respondent to provide kitchen joinery for their client. This...
...manner in which IDEA Services responded to their requests for personal information. [13.2] With the investigations undertaken by IDEA Services in the course of the preparation of Ms Brown’s report. SCOPE OF THE PRESENT PROCEEDINGS Statements of claim and reply [14] Mr and Mrs Marshall are the legal guardians of Eamon. Mr Marshall brought and conducted the present proceedings in that capacity. [15] The original statement of claim dated 11 March 2017 named Mr Marshall as the seco...
...in the Disputes Tribunal. 2. This is a claim for a breach of clause 7.3(1) of the ADLS Agreement for the sale and purchase of a residential property, because the toilet was allegedly not in working order, for the repair costs of $607.89. The applicants have also claimed the filing fee in the Tribunal. 3. The issues discussed today were as follows: a. In all the circumstances, has the clause in the sale and purchase agreement been breached by the vendors? b. If so, what com...
...at that stage, and counsel for LSG prepared their submissions for that hearing accordingly. [7] On 20 May 2016, six days prior to the hearing that had been set for the outstanding applications, the plaintiff filed a second amended statement of claim (Mr Matsuoka has subsequently and less controversially filed a third amended statement of claim). The second amended statement of claim was a substantial pleading. Its preparation and filing must have been in contemplation, if not al...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 352 APPLICANT MQ RESPONDENT NP The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons 1. While driving his vehicle over a property owned by MQ, NP’s vehicle ran over a dog owned by MQ and NQ sadly causing serious injuries. The property is used as a base for MQ’s construction company and the area in front where...