12870 items matching your search terms
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2023] NZDT 655 APPLICANT O Ltd RESPONDENT U Ltd SECOND RESPONDENT Z Ltd The Tribunal orders: Z Ltd is to pay O Ltd $3,865.90 by 22 December 2023. Background 1. The claim relates to a [truck] and [trailer] that O Ltd purchased from U Ltd in March 2022. 2. One of the terms of the sale was that U Ltd would obtain a new COF. U Ltd obtain...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2023] NZDT 747 APPLICANT U Ltd RESPONDENT T Ltd The Tribunal orders: T Ltd is ordered to pay U Ltd the sum of $297.85. Payment of this sum is ordered no later than 10 January 2024. Reasons: 1) On 28 July 2023 a technician employed by the applicant attended the respondent’s premises in [Town 1] to assist with the non-functioning of a machine w...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 558 APPLICANT FD RESPONDENT HO SECOND RESPONDENT MO The Tribunal orders: 1. The claim is dismissed. Reasons: 1. FD purchased a campervan from MO for $20,000.00 after viewing an advertisement [online] and after viewing the campervan. FD alleges MO misrepresented the capability of the campervan to negotiate steep hills. FD seeks t...
...approach 7 Provider rates and hearing activities 7 New policy 8 Case management levels 8 Amendments to grants 8 Amendment criteria 9 Non-lawyer costs and agents’ fees 9 Applications received before and after the July 2012 start date 9 New forms 9 Changes to existing policy 9 Reassignment policy 9 Consultation feedback 11 Questions 11 Proposed Family Fees Schedules: 12 4 Introduction he Ministry of Justice is introducing a new fee framework for fam...
...approach 7 Provider rates and hearing activities 7 New policy 8 Case management levels 8 Amendments to grants 8 Amendment criteria 9 Non-lawyer costs and agents’ fees 9 Applications received before and after the July 2012 start date 9 New forms 9 Changes to existing policy 9 Reassignment policy 9 Consultation feedback 11 Questions 11 Proposed Family Fees Schedules: 12 4 Introduction he Ministry of Justice is introducing a new fee framework for fam...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 456 APPLICANT SE RESPONDENT D Ltd The Tribunal orders: D Ltd is to pay SE $550.00 by 31 August 2023. Reasons: 1. In May 2022, SE provided entertainment services to D Ltd. D Ltd deducted bond money from each of her payments and has refused to return the bond. 2. SE attended the hearing. D Ltd did not attend. On the...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2023] NZDT 613 APPLICANT MM RESPONDENT YY The Tribunal orders: YY is to pay MM $380.00 on or before the 21st day of November 2023. Reasons: Introduction: 1. MM entered into an agreement with YY to rent a room in her boarding house at $190 per week, to be paid fortnightly. 2. On the 12th of November 2022 MM paid $380 being two week...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2023] NZDT 587 APPLICANT SD and QD RESPONDENT NU The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons: 1. SD and QD purchased a motor vehicle in a private sale for $6800 from NU for their son. NU advised SD and QD that he was selling the vehicle on behalf of his parents as they had moved overseas indefinitely three months prior to
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 353 APPLICANT PR RESPONDENT Z Ltd The Tribunal orders: Z Ltd is to pay PR $7,039.08 by 30 June 2023. Reasons 1. PR claims a full refund of the fees he paid Z Ltd for his enrolment in a [Course] at its [City] campus last year. The amount PR claims is $7,821.20. 2. Z Ltd has emphasised PR did not make it clear...
...was attached to information that Mr OM had sent with his complaint. [2] The complaint was not upheld by the Standards Committee. This review application was made by Mr OM who is referred to as the Applicant. [3] The background is that BAI claimed the Applicant owed it money, and when the Applicant wanted certain repairs done to machinery on his farm, BAI agreed to undertake the repair work providing that an amount of money representing its claim was paid into the trust account...