12541 items matching your search terms
...[2024] NZDT 562 APPLICANT ET RESPONDENT F Ltd SECOND RESPONDENT EN RESPONDENT INSURER (if applicable) R Ltd The Tribunal orders: 1. EN is to pay $4,730.00 to ET on or before 4pm 6 September 2024. 2. ET’s claim against F Ltd and R Ltd is dismissed. 3. By virtue of the Slip Rule1, on 16 August 2024, amendments have been made to the order dated 9 August 2024. ET’s had incorrectly been written as EN in several clauses. Reasons: 4...
...information of a sensitive nature. [3] On 16 July 2014, Mr C injured his back while ten pin bowling on a work outing. At the time he was employed by [redacted]. His General Practitioner diagnosed him with a lumbar and thoracic sprain and submitted a claim form to ACC. [4] Because the back injury had occurred at a work outing, it was identified as a work claim. [The employer] was an accredited employer pursuant to ss 181 to 189 of the Accident Compensation Act 2001. Aon was contracte...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 2 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 48 APPLICANT C Ltd RESPONDENT FE The Tribunal orders: FE is to pay $1,487.58 to C Ltd before 10 February 2024. Reasons 1. C Ltd provided FE with relocation of household items services on 4 August 2023. A term of the contract was that goods were carried at owner’s risk. C Ltd claims $1,487.58 being its outstanding invoice for these s...
...are based on income and household composition. Under IRR, HNZC tenants on low incomes pay no more than 25% of their income in rent. [3] In each year from 2000 to 2006 Mr Holmes applied for and was granted income- related rent. In support of each application he was required to submit (and did submit) an income statement for the previous 52 weeks. These statements were issued by Work and Income of the Ministry of Social Development (MSD), the agency responsible for making social welfare...
...communications referred to in the pleadings would be included. [15] Under that formulation, the 2019 LSO would, subject to any issues of privilege, fall for inclusion. In these circumstances, I consider it fair to resolve the privilege issue now. Applicable principles [16] Regulation 44 of the Regulations provides that one of the grounds for raising objection to disclosure is that of legal professional privilege. This term encapsulates solicitor client privilege, which is d...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2019] NZDT 1485 APPLICANT BS RESPONDENT TT The Tribunal hereby orders: 1. TT is to pay the sum of $1,714.95 to BS on or before Thursday 19 December 2019. If he does not have BS’s bank account details for the payment, he should send to the Tribunal a cheque naming BS as payee so that the Tribunal can forward the cheque to BS....
...LAND COURT OF NEW ZEALAND TAIRAWHITI DISTRICT Place: Gisborne Present: C L Wickliffe, Judge 'tWV Lardelli, Clerk of the Court Date: 11 April 2005 Application No: A20040003381 Subject: Mahanga 2Y Legislation: 19/93,18(1 ) (a)/93 Applicant: Lorraine Symes Respondent: Samuel Wairau Counsel: Mr Barber for the. applicant Mr Webb for the Respondent RESERVED DECISION Introduction Minute Book: 161 GIS 19 Mahanga 2Y is a block of Maori Freehold land situated within t...
...DECISION OF MEMBER FLASZYNSKI ON A PRELIMINARY ISSUE DATED: 18 JULY 2022 __________________________________________________________________________ [1] This is a decision on a preliminary issue: whether the Limitation Act 2010 applies to a claim made under the Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 in respect of an insurance contract? Background [2] The Applicants, MA and GA, are the policyholders and trustees of the AFT (the Trust). GA is 92 years old. Sadly, MA passed away during the ti...
...CONCERNING An application for review pursuant to Section 193 of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 AND CONCERNING a determination of the Waikato Bay of Plenty Standards Committee 1 BETWEEN MS BIRKENHEAD of Hastings Applicant AND MS HOLYWELL of Rotorua Respondent The names and identifying details of the parties in this decision have been changed. DECISION [1] The Applicant is Ms Birkenhead who sought a review of a decision by a...
...cost that it would have cost to repair plus the towing and storage of $13,614.00. 9. TU for WH’s position is that the costs are not reasonable and the vehicle was not assessed in person as he wanted. 10. On balance, I find that the costs claimed are reasonable. I say this for reasons which include: a. I preferred the insurer’s evidence that it is not unusual to rely on digital imagery as part of an insurance assessor’s assessment; b. In the absence of any alternative qu...