Search Results

1. 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...

2. 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...

3. [2022] NZEmpC 81 Honeybunch Pure Naturals NZ Ltd v Niekerk [pdf, 164 KB]

   ...NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND I TE KŌTI TAKE MAHI O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU [2022] NZEmpC 81 EMPC 420/2021 IN THE MATTER OF a challenge to a determination of the Employment Relations Authority AND IN THE MATTER OF an application to strike-out proceeding BETWEEN HONEYBUNCH PURE NATURALS NZ LIMITED First Plaintiff AND LISA MARY JOLLY Second Plaintiff AND BARBARA-LEE (BARLEE) VAN NIEKERK Defendant Hearing: 16 Ma...

4. 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...

5. 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...

6. NC v X Ltd [2024] NZDT 274 (10 May 2024) [pdf, 205 KB]

   ...their distribution warehouse may have records of batches received, there is no system to identify what batch was sold to a particular customer. KB stated this is the same for all retailers. I accept that as being likely and reasonable. 8. NC has claimed $12000 in compensation, this figure being based on the likely profits made by X Ltd on NC’s past orders. However without evidence to support a loss, the amount of compensation claimed cannot be justified. X Ltd have offered a gif...

7. KQ & WQ v EN & MN [2021] NZDT 1439 (27 April 2021) [pdf, 161 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 6 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2021] NZDT 1439 APPLICANT KQ & WQ RESPONDENT EN & MN The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons: 1. EN and MN wanted to subdivide their property and sell two sections. KQ and WQ entered a contract with EN and MN to purchase a section, subject to subdivision. The agreement had a sunset clause that allowed EN

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. DN v IL Ltd [2023] NZDT 644 (8 November 2023) [pdf, 200 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2023] NZDT 644 APPLICANT DN RESPONDENT IL Ltd The Tribunal orders: 1. The claim is dismissed. 2. This order is to be emailed and posted to the parties. Reasons: 3. In August 2020 DN purchased a spa pool (‘pool’) from IL Ltd. IL Ltd supplied DN with a replacement pump in August 2022 after it failed. 4. Several months la...

10. 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...