10905 items matching your search terms
Templates V10 – July 2016 page 1 07/16 form 34 Legal aid file no. Tax Invoice Family Legal Aid Fixed Fee Maintenance Invoice date Invoice number GST number Lead provider’s ref. To: Legal Aid, DX Box Number City Name of aided person Name of lead provider Provider number Name of law firm Firm number Details of claim Date latest activity completed Date of final disposition (if final invoice) Interim invoice Fin...
Templates V12 – August 2017 page 1 08/17 form 34 Legal aid file no. Tax Invoice Family Legal Aid Fixed Fee Maintenance Invoice date Invoice number GST number Lead provider’s ref. To: Legal Aid, DX Box Number City Name of aided person Name of lead provider Provider number Name of law firm Firm number Details of claim Date latest activity completed Date of final disposition (if final invoice) Interim invoice F...
Version 19 – September 2022 page 1 09/22 form 30 Tax Invoice Family Legal Aid Fixed Fees Adoption Legal aid file no. Invoice date Invoice number GST number Lead provider’s ref. To: Legal Aid, DX Box Number City Customer Lead provider Provider number Law firm Firm number Details of claim Fixed Fee: Date fixed fee(s) completed Fixed Fee Plus: Covers period from to Interim invoice Final invoice Please record...
...OR SUBSEQUENT RESPONDENT LN The Tribunal orders: The claims against the three respondents are all dismissed. Reasons [1] The applicants, JI and UN, claim that the respondents failed in their respective duties to ascertain and inform them, when they purchased a property, that a part of a garage on the property encroached on neighbouring land. The first respondent, NB Ltd, represented by UN, is the real estate agency that acted for the vendor in the transaction; TD was the...
...which state that “it was... resolved to authorise two family members to sign the lease of the Incorporation to the MacNab family.” [33] On 6 April 2010, counsel for the Incorporation submitted that Mr Marumaru‟s claims were vexatious and requested that the Court strike it out 2 . 1 In support of his position, Mr Bell filed the following: Copy of the Chairman‟s report for the year ending 30 June 2008, presented at...
...Hearing [25] First Cause of Action: Breach of Contract – Clause 10 of the Lease – s 18(1)(d) of TTWMA [27] Second Cause of Action: Breach of Contract – Clause 8 of the Lease – s 18(1)(d) of TTWMA [50] Informal v Formal Lease? [55] Implied Term in the Formal Lease? [65] Have the Defendants Breach Clause 8 of the Lease? [71] Third Cause of Action: Injury to Māori Freehold Land – s 18(1)(c) of TTWMA [85] Claims...
...Ruakaka, Takahiwai, Maungakaramea, Poupouwhenua, Motutere Island, Te Mahe and Waipu land blocks, and other lands taken for Public Works. Further concerns are coastal lands and the seabed around Bream Bay, fishing rights and mineral rights. The claim requests the return of land, some of which now appears to be in private ownership Status: Consolidated 1.1.0056(a) Wai 504, 1.1(a) Amendment Received: 5 Nov 99 1.1.0057 Wai no: 510, 1.1 Date of SOC: 28 Apr 95 Date received: 09 May 95 Claimant: A...
...tukuna rā i raro i te mana o Wāhanga 5(9) me (10) o te Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975 E whakakapi ana tēnei Tuhinga Ārahi i ngā tuhinga ārahi e whai ake nei : . ‘Mediation’, 18 Mahuru 1990 . ‘Translations’, 29 Pipiri 1991 . ‘Claim Terminology’, 1 Hōngongoi 1991 . ‘Claim Priorities’, 18 Hōngongoi 1991 . ‘Negotiations and Settlements’, 22 Hereturikōkā 1991 . ‘State Enterprise and Education Lands’, 5 Mahuru 1991 . ‘Procedure’, 1 Whiringa-ā-rangi...
...Taranaki Whānui following their Treaty of Waitangi settlement with the Crown. 466 Aotea MB 167 [3] Although PNBST received the land at Shelly Bay, through a series of events it became owned by Shelly Bay Taikuru Limited (“SBTL”). SBTL was formed through the amalgamation of Shelly Bay Investments Limited and SBTL, which were and are associated with the property development company, the Wellington Company Limited. [4] The applicants are members of Taranaki Whānui and bene...
...26. I find that the way in which B Ltd dealt with the quoting and subsequent invoicing of this job was likely to mislead SU. 27. B Ltd made a representation that “…. we could do this for $19,979.09 + GST.” This was in response to a request by SU for B Ltd to have a look at “the quote for any savings that could be made….” 28. The quote which SU asked B Ltd to look at included the price for not only the roofing work, but also the spouting and scaffolding work....