12924 items matching your search terms
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2022] NZDT 171 APPLICANT MH RESPONDENT NB Ltd The Tribunal orders: NB Ltd is to pay MH $1,028.85 within 28 days. Reasons [1] MH claims that NB Ltd, represented by director EN, unsatisfactorily carried out repair work to her car, and claims $1,312.84 as compensation. EN denies liability. [2] MH’s case is set out in detail in...
...‘signed’ acknowledgement from the customer to this effect. Allowing for the modern realities as to the manner in which contracts are entered into, I consider a ‘signed’ acknowledgement could be electronic, by way of completion of an on- line booking form. 10) The applicant says the relative booking was made by phone, and followed up with texts. The respondent says that its booking form (with its standard terms and conditions attached) was completed and it has submitted document...
ANTO V PLANET SPICE LIMITED NZEmpC WN [2012] NZEmpC 37 [1 March 2012] IN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT WELLINGTON [2012] NZEmpC 37 WRC 39/10 IN THE MATTER OF an application for leave to file challenge out of time BETWEEN ALEXANDER ANTO Plaintiff AND PLANET SPICE LIMITED Defendant Hearing: (on the papers) Counsel: Daniel Vincent, counsel for the plaintiff Paul McBride, counsel for the defendant Judgment: 1 March 2012 COSTS JUDGMENT OF JUDGE A...
...Registrar: In person. Complainant: In person. Adviser: S Singh, Singhs Barristers & Solicitors, Auckland. Date Issued: 19 March 2014 2 DECISION Introduction [1] The complainant dealt with his own immigration application; he provided information about his wife but did not mention he had separated from his wife and was in a relationship with someone else. [2] He then engaged the adviser to assist with a new application. Immigration New Zealand rais...
...another agency where the request seeks urgency and the basis for the urgency request is not a matter that the recipient is able to sensibly assess but the agency to which the request is transferred is the only agency able to properly evaluate the claimed basis for the urgency? 4 [8.2] Question 2: Is a request for urgency under s 37 of the Privacy Act a relevant factor for an agency in determining whether to refuse a request for personal information under s 29(1)(j) of that Act? [...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 768 APPLICANT DO RESPONDENT J Ltd The Tribunal orders: J Ltd is to pay DO $3,394.58 by no later than 3rd December 2024. Reasons 1. The Applicant says that he purchased a vehicle from the Respondent and the right headlight of the vehicle is not working. The Applicant states that he provided ample time for the Respondent to fix th...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 292 APPLICANT BN RESPONDENT D Ltd The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons Introduction 1. In October 2023, BN purchased a horse ([the horse]) from D Ltd for the purpose of developing [the horse] for himself to compete in dressage and show jumping events to a high level. 2. BN claims $24,155.06 on the basis that due to a p...
...$550.00 on each of 11 items of damage, a total of $6,050.00, which U Ltd regarded as unjustified. In addition, J Ltd had not covered the work that NX had done in arranging for repairs at the property and representing U Ltd in dealing with the issues applicable to the claim. LM considered these costs to be “professional fees”, and included in the policy. [4] J Ltd denied liability for any part of the sum claim by U Ltd. I shall deal with the issues in turn. The excesses [5] LM...
...already considered in the determination and which were not raised within the 90-day period prescribed in the Employment Relations Act 2000 (the Act). 2 They were not raised in the proceedings before the Authority. They are now the subject of applications seeking leave to raise further grievances out of time. b) ARC 79/13: This is a de novo challenge by the defendant Board of Trustees to a determination of the Authority dated 30 September 2013. 3 It relates to the costs aw...
Claim No: 2442 Under the Weathertight Homes Resolution Services Act 2002 In the matter of an adjudication claim Between Zhen Zhen Mao and Ying Peng Claimants And Douglas Mackay Howitt Respondent Determination Tuesday 29 August 2006 1. Index 1. Index 1 2. Summary 1 3. The Adjudication Claim 2 4. The Claim 4 5. Liability: Douglas Mackay Howitt 7 6. General Damages 8 7. Interest 8 8. Costs 10 9. Conclusion 10 2. Summary 2.1 The...