Search Results

1. Ngāti Taimanawaiti Māori Incorporation - Lot 2 DP 29547 (9 Old North Road, Orewa) (2016) 135 Taitokerau MB 20 (135 TTK 20) [pdf, 196 KB]

   ...under review [8] On 4 May 2016, a Deputy Registrar wrote a letter to the applicants rejecting the injunction application. That letter states: 135 Taitokerau MB 22 Thank you for filing the above injunction application in our Auckland Information Office on 6 April 2016. Upon review of your application the following matters have been considered by the Court: (a) Does the Court have jurisdiction? (i) The land of which the injunction relates to is claimed as Lot 2 DP 2...

2. MH v NB Ltd [2022] NZDT 171 (4 October 2022) [pdf, 99 KB]

   ...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 her claim form. In summary, she said that she had taken the car in question, [the car], to NB Ltd’s premises on 15 March 2022, and had left it there with instructions that NB Ltd should install a new PCV valve, a new O2 sensor and windscreen wiper pivot...

3. SI & XQ v G Ltd [2022] NZDT 40 (14 February 2022) [pdf, 119 KB]

   ...so, what is the remedy and can the filing fee be recovered? What were the terms of the contract and was the contract frustrated? 4. There was no dispute that the terms of the contract agreed were set out in the client confirmation booking form of 14 January 2019. Nor was there any dispute that the terms provided that where the client cancels the contract deposits are non-refundable and where the cancellation is within 30 days of the event the full payment is not refundable....

4. BN & NP v NT [2024] NZDT 316 (6 May 2024) [pdf, 237 KB]

   ...Further comments include: “At some stage the accessway has also been widened to allow for vehicles passing. This has resulted in an increase in low permeable area, and the grass swales have been flattened and filled with limestone, altering the performance of the stormwater controls.” 30. Of particular note, the Conclusions and recommendations section of the report of 03 August 2023 states: “Due to the nature of the site some stormwater run off is to be expected. However, we be...

5. Reweti - Part Waikoukou No 406 (2015) 96 Taitokerau MB 231 (96 TTK 231) [pdf, 259 KB]

   ...Native Land Court awarded the Waikoukou block to Paora Tuhaere and Wiremu Reweti Te Whenua. [3] Between 1884 and 1908, parts of the Waikoukou block were gifted to (and later taken by) the Crown for railway purposes. This includes the land now forming Lot 1 and 2. Following the corporatisation of New Zealand Railways, Lot 1 and 2 were declared to be surplus Crown land. In 2001 Lot 1 and 2 were vested back into Paora and Wiremu as the original owners. [4] Applications have now bee...

6. UE & QO v CO Ltd [2023] NZDT 159 (23 March 2023) [pdf, 116 KB]

   Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 159 APPLICANT UE and QO RESPONDENT CO Ltd The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons: 1. This order should be read with that dated 27/10/23. 2. This dispute had its origins back in 2012 when the UE and QO’s (the applicants) home in [Street] suffered devastating and catastrophic damage in a natural disaster, a land s...

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

   ...infiltration incident, where he conceded that he may have missed a scheduled spray. 5. To support his claim that the insect infiltrations were caused by poor workmanship in the installation of the unit, KW provided evidence from B Ltd in the form of an email that states in part ‘The entry point of the sensor beam wire which came in through the back of the control box was not sealed. That is where the slug could have got in and shorted the board, and as for the spraying of insec...

8. NC v KU [2023] NZDT 425 (4 September 2023) [pdf, 186 KB]

   ...car the car works fine? 5. I find that KU did not make a misrepresentation when she meet with NC and clarified that the cars works fine, and that money would need to be spent on the car to get it road legal. I make this finding on the following information: a. KU stated she informed NC that the car worked, and that money would need to be spent to get it road legal. She said NC kept making low offers to buy the car and when doing so he would say that he didn’t know if there was any...

9. DI v UM [2024] NZDT 727 (23 September 2024) [pdf, 184 KB]

   ...duress to accept the quote? 6. DI suggested that she was pressured into accepting the quote. She gave examples of UM taking her for coffee and making several contacts with her about accepting the quote. These examples given by DI are acceptable forms of soliciting for business. They do not reach the level of ‘duress’. Duress is the imposition of unacceptable pressure by threats that force a person to enter a contract. Duress has two fundamental elements: first, there must be the exe...

10. DS & ES v KE & X Ltd [2024] NZDT 767 (8 October 2024) [pdf, 99 KB]

    ...matter was heard before in via an in-person hearing at the request of the parties so that I could use the photo taken by DS and compare it with the Respondent to determine likeness as the identity of the driver is in question. 17. Given the information, I find that I cannot confirm that it was the Respondent who was the driver of the vehicle. Having viewed the photo and the Respondent in person and compared to the photo of the Respondent on his driver’s licence, I cannot confirm t...