12922 items matching your search terms
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 655 APPLICANT BL RESPONDENT E Limited RESPONDENT UFH Limited The Tribunal orders: This claim is dismissed. Reasons 1. BL purchased an E Limited Heat Pump in 2021. From early on the system did not work properly and the ducting system kept ripping causing the system to fail. BL contacted the supplier who were unable to remedy t...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court - [2022] NZDT 103 APPLICANT GJ Limited RESPONDENT EI Limited The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons: 1. On 28 August 2019, GJ Limited (the purchaser) entered into an agreement with EI Limited (the vendor) for sale and purchase of a business. The purchaser claims that it later discovered that gas bottles we...
...2017 DECISION OF TRIBUNAL DISMISSING PROCEEDINGS 1 Introduction [1] When this two day fixture commenced on 19 July 2017 neither Mr Mihaka nor Ms Raue (his McKenzie friend) appeared. Housing New Zealand Corporation (HNZC) made oral application for the proceedings to be dismissed. In this decision we set out our reasons for granting that application. 1 [This decision is to be cited as: Mihaka v Housing New Zeal...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 6 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 626 APPLICANTS And RESPONDENT In Counterclaim MD and ND RESPONDENT And APPLICANT In Counterclaim D Ltd The Tribunal orders: 1. MD and ND are to pay D Ltd $816.25 by 10 August 2024. 2. Within 2 days of receiving payment, D Ltd is to release all photography and videos taken over the two days for MD and ND, to be s...
CLAIM FILE NO: 00765 UNDER The Weathertight Homes Resolution Services Act 2002 IN THE MATTER of an adjudication BETWEEN NICOLE ODETTE MILLER-HARD Claimant AND MELANIE GAIL STEWART First Respondent AND ROBIN LAWRENCE FORD Second Respondent AND BAY BUILDING CERTIFIERS LIMITED Third Respondent AND No Fourth Respondent, the TAURANGA DISTRICT COUNCIL having been struck out. AND No Fifth Respondent, GEOFFREY MORRISON having been struck out...
...A20120008996 UNDER Section 30, Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993 IN THE MATTER OF Hako Hauraki - Determine the appropriate representation of Hako Hauraki for the purposes of Treaty Negotiations BETWEEN MAATAI ARIKI RAWIRI KAUAE TE TOKI Applicant Hearing: 2013 Chief Judge's MB 368 - 369 dated 17 June 2013 55 Waikato-Maniapoto 227-253 dated 25 March 2013 52 Waikato-Maniapoto 103-104 dated 19 February 2013 2012 Chief Judge's MB 506-507 dat...
...JACKSON NZEmpC [2017] NZEmpC 38 [5 April 2017] IN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT AUCKLAND [2017] NZEmpC 38 EMPC 135/2016 IN THE MATTER OF proceedings removed from the Employment Relations Authority AND IN THE MATTER of an application for access to Court documents BETWEEN EDEN GROUP LIMITED Plaintiff AND TIMOTHY NIGEL JACKSON First Defendant AND PHILLIP ANDREW KITE Second Defendant AND CHRISTOPHER JOHN BLACKMAN Thi...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 9 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 105 APPLICANT C Ltd RESPONDENT J Inc The Tribunal orders: 1. J Inc is to pay C Ltd $30,000.00 on or before 15 March 2024. 2. The counterclaim by J Inc is dismissed. Reasons: 1. J Inc leased premises in [City] from C Ltd. J Inc ran a [restaurant] under the name ”IU” from the premises for many years. The arrangement came to an...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2022] NZDT 205 APPLICANT MI Ltd RESPONDENT QD Ltd The Tribunal orders: MI Ltd’s claim against QD Ltd is dismissed. Reasons: 1. The applicant purchased a pilates reformer and tower from the respondent on Trade Me. The cost for the reformer was $4,300.00. The applicant claims the reformer bed was not in the condition it...
LCRO 39/2012 CONCERNING an application for review pursuant to section 193 of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 AND CONCERNING a determination of the Standards Committee BETWEEN KV Applicant AND TE Respondent The names and identifying details of the parties in this decision have been changed. DECISION [1] Mr KV has applied for a review of a decision by the Standards Committee in which the Committee decided that it was not necessary...