Search Results

1. [2022] NZEmpC 43 Stenhouse v Towman Towing Group Ltd [pdf, 222 KB]

   ...[1] Judgment was issued in these proceedings on 26 October 2021.1 It dealt with two challenges arising from a determination of the Employment Relations Authority.2 Ms Stenhouse challenged the whole of the determination and added a claim alleging that Towman Towing Group Ltd had breached her right to privacy.3 [2] Towman’s challenge was confined to disputing the Authority’s conclusion that a personal grievance had arisen because of the circumstances in which Ms Ste...

2. Wolverhampton v Shaftesbury LCRO 145 / 2009 (23 June 2010) [pdf, 170 KB]

   ...said it had not been posted nor had it been placed in an envelope. The Standards Committee informed the Practitioner accordingly. [4] The Practitioner wrote again to the Standards Committee on 15 June 2009 challenging the truthfulness of the Applicant‟s claim that she did not know how the document came to be in her letter box. He contended that she had found the document among her papers and had herself placed it there. He reiterated his earlier stance that the Applicant ha...

3. JK v SY LCRO 271/2013 (9 September 2016) [pdf, 76 KB]

   ...in maintaining the deceit claim at and after the September 2009 settlement conference, despite his admission to Mr [RS] constitutes an attempt to pervert the course of justice and the Committee has not made any inquiries on that issue. (f) The request that a retired High Court Judge investigate the claim was justified because: 9 (i) The complaint was made against Mr [SY], a senior partner in a well-known law firm. (ii) The nature of the complaint and the background proceed...

4. NC v K Ltd [2024] NZDT 603 (12 September 2024) [pdf, 186 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 603 APPLICANT NC RESPONDENT K Ltd The Tribunal orders: The claim by NC against K Ltd is dismissed. Reasons 1. In 2021 NC (the applicant) purchased a [laptop] from K Ltd (the respondent). In 2024 the laptop began to malfunction including freezing and not turning on. The applicant now brings a claim against the respondent for a refund...

5. LC Ltd v XU Ltd [2024] NZDT 356 (21 May 2024) [pdf, 177 KB]

   ...object under the law is to put the applicant in a position it would have been in had the damage not occurred. As a result, I find that XU Ltd is liable for the reasonable costs of repairing the damage caused to LC Ltd’s vehicle. Are the costs claimed for the repairs reasonable? 6. At the hearing, IU, motor vehicle assessor, was called to give evidence around details of and the reasonableness of the costs incurred in repairing the vehicle. IU confirmed that all the damage repaire...

6. [2024] NZEmpC 219 Oliver v Biggs [pdf, 228 KB]

   ...VINCENT OLIVER v STUART DALE BIGGS [2024] NZEmpC 219 [19 November 2024] IN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH I TE KŌTI TAKE MAHI O AOTEAROA ŌTAUTAHI [2024] NZEmpC 219 EMPC 261/2024 IN THE MATTER OF an application for a sanction AND IN THE MATTER OF an application for leave to file amended pleadings BETWEEN DARREN VINCENT OLIVER Plaintiff AND STUART DALE BIGGS Defendant Hearing: On the papers...

7. UB and DB v ND [2020] NZDT 1391 (29 October 2020) [pdf, 230 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 5 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2020] NZDT 1391 APPLICANT UB and DB RESPONDENT ND T/A ON The Tribunal orders: ND trading as ON is to pay $3078.88 to UB and DB on or before 19 November 2020. Reasons 1. In March 2018 DB contacted ND trading as ON to arrange marquee hire for her and her then- fiancee’s wedding at [Redacted] Beach, the total contract p...

8. C Ltd v KQ [2022] NZDT 1 (14 March 2022) [pdf, 106 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2022] NZDT 1 APPLICANT C Ltd RESPONDENT KQ The Tribunal orders: KQ is to pay $2,500.00 to C Ltd by 3 April 2022. Reasons Is KQ liable for the insurance excess? 1. KQ contracted with C Ltd for staging of a house she was selling. Unfortunately goods supplied for the purpose were stolen during the staging. C...

9. Morison v New Zealand Association of Counsellors [2024] NZHRRT 46 [pdf, 362 KB]

   ...Solicitors’ Letter. [12.5] The PMARS Letter. [12.6] The Counsellor’s First Response. 3 The counsellor in this case was a contracted provider with PMARS. PMARS and its contracted providers liaise with ACC case managers in connection with ACC claims processes. 4 These reasons are set out at [95] below. 5 Within the 20 working days by which a decision was required to have been made as to whether a request was to be granted under s 44(1) of the Privacy Act 1993 (PA). 4 [1...

10. QD Ltd v SI [2023] NZDT 559 (17 November 2023) [pdf, 202 KB]

    CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2023] NZDT 559 APPLICANT QD Ltd RESPONDENT SI APPLICANT'S INSURER J Ltd The Tribunal orders: 1. SI is to pay QD Ltd’s insurer J Ltd, $4543.05 on or before 30 November 2023. Reasons: 1. Mr X, a director of QD Ltd, and SI were involved in a motor vehicle collision. Mr X was reversing from a driveway into [road] and sa...