Search Results

1. AS Ltd v ZH Ltd [2014] NZDT 659 (26 September 2014) [pdf, 20 KB]

   ...TRIBUNAL [2014] NZDT 659 BETWEEN AS LIMITED APPLICANT AND ZH LIMITED RESPONDENT Date of Order: 26 September 2014 Referee: Referee Perfect ORDER OF THE DISPUTES TRIBUNAL The Tribunal hereby orders that the claim is dismissed, the contract dated 18 March 2014 stands and the contract dated 30 April 2014 is cancelled as of the date of this order. Facts [1] On 18 March 2014 the manager of AS Limited’s Z store signed a written agreement wit...

2. CC v LL [2021] NZDT 1693 (28 May 2021) [pdf, 87 KB]

   ...puppy due to a change in his personal circumstances. He requested a refund of his deposit. LL responded, “I’ve got a person interested but he has yet to put the deposit in once he does I’ll refund your deposit.” However, LL subsequently informed CC that a few buyers had backed out, so he would not be refunding the deposit. 3. CC now claims a refund of $500.00 together with his $45.00 filing fee. The issue to be determined is whether LL is obliged to refund the deposit. Is LL ob...

3. Waitangi Tribunal theme Q - Foreshore [pdf, 559 KB]

   ...The earlier cases 3.2. Judge Acheson and the northern foreshore cases 3.3. In re Ninety-Mile Beach 4.0. The law of foreshore ownership: summary and analysis 5.0. Coastal planning: the current legal framwork 6.0. Conclusions and options for reform Bibliography of secondary sources Appendix: Selected Principal Documents 1. Kapanga Parumoana case (1872) 2 Coromandel MB 315-6, and extracts from Daily Southern Cross. 2. Crown Law opinion on foreshore area at Wenderholm. 3. Opi...

4. Cook v Department of Corrections [2023] NZHRRT 21 [pdf, 218 KB]

   ...therefore lack jurisdiction in respect of the second request.24 [80] Mr Tennet accepted that conclusion on jurisdiction but emphasised he drew this event to our attention in support of his submission that the Department’s responses to the two requests was evidence of a systemic failure to respond appropriately and lawfully to information requests. [81] We do not consider that the Department’s responses to the two requests provide an evidential foundation that supports Mr Tennet...

5. Hearn v Parklane Investments Limited [pdf, 178 KB]

   ...liability or in turn seek indemnity from others. PRELIMINARY ISSUES The Parties First and Tenth Respondents - Woodward Shelf Company No. 1 Limited and Mr Hayim Nachum [3] The first respondent, Woodward Shelf Company No 1 Limited, formerly Boulcott Investments Group Limited, previously known as Parklane Investments Limited (Parklane) was the previous owner and developer of the site on which the property is situated. Parklane took part in some of these proceedings,...

6. FH v GJ LCRO 87/2014 (7 Aug 2015) [pdf, 77 KB]

   ...[15] In addition to filing proceedings against Mr GJ and HK after the complaint was made, Ms FH also laid a complaint with the Police. The police complaint acknowledgement records the complaint as being that of “Theft (over $1,000).” Ms FH requested the Committee to defer consideration of Mr GJ’s complaint about her until these had been disposed of. The Committee nevertheless continued with its consideration of the complaint and its determination. [16] The disciplinary proc...

7. Form-44-Application-for-contempt-enforcement-proceedings-FINAL-9-December-2024.pdf [pdf, 496 KB]

   When should I use this form? This form lets you apply for a court order against the judgment debtor where they have the means to pay the judgment debt but are refusing to do so. Use this form if all the following apply: • you are the judgment creditor • the money owed in a judgment or court order has not been paid • you can show that the judgment debtor has the means to pay the debt but is refusing to do so. For example, a financial statement or financial assessment has been complet...

8. EJ v HL & BL [2020] NZDT 1330 (10 June 2020) [pdf, 192 KB]

   ...were present at the time of sale. 12. Ms J states that she had done less than 1,000kms of travel at the time she became aware of the defects, and that the float has spent most of its time in her ownership parked at her property. Whilst this information is not able to be subject to independent verification, the defects upon which the claim are based are not in the nature of fair wear and tear but are fundamental to the structure. Minor matters, such as a wheel bearing, safety chain...

9. DX & SX v TZ [2021] NZDT 1687 (27 May 2021) [pdf, 191 KB]

   ...grow. Conclusion 19. For all these reasons TZ is obliged to pay DX and SX the sum of $1,430.59 in accordance with the terms of this order. Referee: Malthus - DTR Date: 27 May 2021 Page 4 of 4 Information for Parties Rehearings You can apply for a rehearing if you believe that something prevented the proper decision from being made: for example, the relevant information was not available at the time. If you wish to apply for a rehe...

10. QN v NI [2023] NZDT 128 (12 May 2023) [pdf, 193 KB]

    ...claimed to be paid $6,349.61 for the costs he incurred to repair the property. 7. The issues to be resolved are: (a) Did NI agree to sell her house to QN? CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 2 of 4 (b) If not, did NI allow QN to perform work upgrading the property that she has been enriched by? (c) If so, what loss can QN show he has incurred that he is intitled to be compensated for? Did NI agree to sell her house to QN? 8. QN said that the agreement was that he...