12515 items matching your search terms
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 433 APPLICANT NX RESPONDENT B Association Ltd SECOND RESPONDENT JE The Tribunal orders: NX’s claims against B Association Ltd and JE are dismissed. REASONS Brief Details of Claims 1. On 16 October 2022, NX purchased a [vehicle] for $10,500 from JE, in a private sale. Prior to purchase, NX a...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2022] NZDT 167 APPLICANT TD RESPONDENT DJ Ltd The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons: 1. TD parked his 1996 Toyota Surf vehicle in the paid outdoor carpark at DJ Ltd’s premises on 19 August 2022. When he attempted to collect it on 23 August 2022 he discovered that it had been stolen. He claimed from his insurer...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 320 APPLICANT EC RESPONDENT SX SECOND RESPONDENT HN The Tribunal orders: 1. HN is to return the [motorcycle 2] to EC on or before 24 August 2023. 2. SX and HN, jointly and severally, are to pay the sum of $2,345.00 to EC on or before 24 August 2023. Reasons: 1. For many years, EC stored belongings i...
...also incorporates mediation. Alternative solution: A design solution that differs totally or partially from the solutions given in the compliance documents, yet complies with the Building Code. Applicant: A person or legal entity that files an application. A respondent can be an applicant in relation to a procedural application or an application for strike-out, etc. Application: A claim form completed in anticipation of an assessment of a dwelling-house where the applicant has s...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2021] NZDT 1696 APPLICANT LX RESPONDENT GQ Ltd The Tribunal orders: 1. The Respondent shall pay The Applicant $1,715.00 by 17 June 2021. 2. The Respondent shall collect the washing machine from The Applicant’s premises by 24 June 2021 or pay The Applicant an additional $250.00 by that date to dispose of it. Reasons: 1....
IN THE WEATHERTIGHT HOMES TRIBUNAL TRI-2021-100-002 BETWEEN HELEN BERNADETTE O’SULLIVAN, FIONA CHERIE WHITE & ANDREW RODGER WILTON as trustees of the WILTON FAMILY TRUST Claimants AND DEANE FLUIT BUILDER LTD First Respondent AND TAB DESIGN LTD (Removed) Second Respondent AND TILING SOLUTIONS WANAKA LTD Third Respondent AND QUEENSTOWN LAKES DISTRICT COUNCIL Fourth Respondent AND VALSPAR PAINT (NZ) LTD Fifth Respondent AND WILTON JOUBERT
...kilometre. 2. By the time KG collected her luggage and arrived at the boarding gate, the door was shut and she was not permitted to board. As a consequence KG had to purchase a flight with a different airline for the price of (US) $559.94. She claimed to be compensated for that fare. 3. The issues to resolve the claim are: (a) Did VB Inc breach the contract? (b) If so, what loss can KG show she has incurred that she is entitled to be compensated for? Did VB Inc breac...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 583 APPLICANT GM RESPONDENT D Ltd The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons 1. GM purchased a [dress] from D Ltd in October 2023. She wore the dress for a very short time and noticed a significant tear along a seam. She informed D Ltd and the dress was replaced along with a $100 voucher. 2. The replacement dress arr...
...circumstances, when it is in the interests of justice to do so. [8] Rule 12 of the Rules specifies a range of matters that must be considered when determining an application for access. It provides: 12 Matters to be considered In determining a request for access under rule 11, the Judge must consider the nature of, and the reasons given for, the request and take into account each of the following matters that is relevant to the request or any objection to the request: (a) the o...
...failed to apply in time, and withdrew an application for visitor visas dishonestly; telling Immigration New Zealand that he had instructions to do so. [1.4] He dishonestly told the Authority when responding to the complaint that he had lodged the request for reconsideration in time, and had instructions to withdraw the visitor visa applications. The Registrar’s statement of complaint alleges neither claim was true. [1.5] Mr Fu took lodgement fees for the reconsideration and later reque...