12922 items matching your search terms
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 6 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 436 APPLICANT NQ APPLICANT OR RESPONDENT CN The Tribunal orders: CN is to pay NQ and OR the sum of $4,799.95 on or before 25 September 2023. Background 1. NQ and OR were the owners of a residential property in [City] which they sold under an agreement for sale and purchase dated 12 May 2023 to CN. The sale was...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 165 APPLICANT NF RESPONDENT EN The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons: 1. NF lives in the back flat in a cross-lease development containing four flats. EN lives in the third flat. 2. NF brought the current claim because the lease contains a common path down the side of the flats. There is a gate across this pat...
...AND ZIZ Ltd SECOND RESPONDENT Date of Order: 26 May 2014 Referee: Referee Perfect ORDER OF THE DISPUTES TRIBUNAL The Tribunal hereby orders that the first respondent (ZI) is to pay the sum of $1,500 directly to the applicants (AR) on or before Tuesday 10 June 2014; and the claim against the second respondent (ZIZ Ltd) is dismissed. Facts [1] AR (the applicants) engaged ZI (the first respondent) to represent them in a personal grievance claim against Z...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2023] NZDT 657 APPLICANT MI RESPONDENT E Ltd The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons: 1. MI purchased tickets to a [concert 1] at the [venue] originally scheduled for 1 April 2023. On 31 March the concert was postponed to a rain date of 2 April 2023. MI was unable to attend on the 2 April so requested a refund of he...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 370 APPLICANT V Ltd RESPONDENT BT The Tribunal orders: BT is to pay V Ltd the sum of $26,318.75 on or before 5pm Monday 12 June 2023. Reasons: 1. V Ltd contracted with BT as an Independent contractor to provide financial advice in Life and Health Insurance sales for two companies, A and B (the provider). When a sale was...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 2 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 301 APPLICANT LJ and MJ RESPONDENT GT The Tribunal orders: GT is to pay the sum of $3,000.00 to LJ and MJ on or before Thursday 24 August 2023. Reasons: 1. On 1 July 2022, LJ and MJ met with GT at her business [a restaurant]. They chose menu 3, with a few minor changes, and made a booking for their child’s 21st
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 363 APPLICANT SW RESPONDENT IA The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons: 1. On 13 October 2022, SW bought two wireless home security cameras at a total price of $250.00, being $125.00 each from IA, who used the Facebook Account name [redacted]. After 3 months the cameras free cloud storage expire...
...AAS SECOND APPLICANT AND ZZI RESPONDENT Date of Order: 21 July 2010 Referee: Referee Robertshawe ORDER OF THE DISPUTES TRIBUNAL The Tribunal hereby orders that the Applicants’ claim be dismissed. Facts [1] On 16 November 2009, AAR entered into an Agreement for Sale and Purchase to buy a property in [a town] for $120,000.00 from ZZI Ltd (as represented by JR in these proceedings). AAR signed t...
...Bigson Gumbeze was employed as a registered social worker by the Chief Executive of Oranga Tamariki – Ministry for Children until he was dismissed on 15 December 2017. [2] In the Employment Relations Authority Mr Gumbeze’s personal grievance claim was unsuccessful.1 1 Gumbeze v Chief Executive of Oranga Tamariki – Ministry for Children [2022] NZERA 232 (Member Cheyne). [3] The Authority’s determination was dated 2 June 2022. The time available to Mr Gumbeze...
...AND ZXO Ltd SECOND RESPONDENT Date of Order: 13 June 2013 Referee: Referee Cadogan ORDER OF THE DISPUTES TRIBUNAL The Tribunal hereby orders that the case is struck out for lack of jurisdiction as the claim falls outside the limitation period imposed by the Building Act 2004. Facts [1] This matter involves problems caused by dampness in the ceiling of the home of ACP and NP, who have been represented today by ACP’s father, DY....