12542 items matching your search terms
IN THE DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2014] NZDT 665 BETWEEN AU APPLICANT AND ZF District Council RESPONDENT Date of Order: 5 August 2014 Referee: Referee Savage ORDER OF THE DISPUTES TRIBUNAL The Tribunal hereby orders that the claim is struck out. Facts [1] In 1974 CC Borough installed the sewer line on AU's street and offered the opportunity for connections, to property owners. Mr and Mrs AU did not connect and opted to cont...
Page 1 of 5 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 17 APPLICANT ZH RESPONDENT C Ltd The Tribunal orders: C Ltd is to pay to ZH the amount of $2,400.00. Payment is to be made on or before 4 March 2024. Reasons 1. ZH rented a car from C Ltd on October 21, 2023. A bond and rental fee was paid for a two day hire period. The return date was a public holiday whereby C Ltd were closed. ZH was given ins...
...timely services. 4. The issues I must decide are: a. Was the work done as contracted? b. If so, is EI entitled to $603.75 as claimed, or any other sum? Was the work done as contracted? 5. Under contract law, a legally binding contract is formed when both parties intend to contract on agreed terms and intend for those terms to be legally binding. The terms of a contract are formed at the beginning, not at the end, and what was agreed is looked at objectively, i.e., by looking at...
...only in response to the original complaint made by the Respondent [8] The Applicant has applied for a review of this decision. Review [9] The review proceeded by way of an Applicant only hearing on 5 July 2011. [10] During the hearing I requested that the Applicant provide me subsequently with the material that was posted on the website. This was provided by a letter dated 21 July and 3 included translations of comments posted on the website by Mr WD about the Applicant...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 159 APPLICANT NH Ltd RESPONDENT NZ The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons: 1. In June 2020, NZ engaged NH Ltd to construct a driveway for his newly built home. On 31 July 2020, after the work was complete, NH Ltd invoiced NZ $30,111.60, but NZ was unhappy with the job and only paid $13,800.00. NH Ltd now claims $18,81...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 5 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2021] NZDT 1670 APPLICANT BN APPLICANT SC APPLICANT XC RESPONDENT NT E SECOND RESPONDENT MP The Tribunal orders: NT is to pay BN, SC, and XC (as trustees of the [The trust]) $5,625.71 by 15 July 2021. Background 1. [The trust] owns a residential property in [location]. The property is comprised...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 6 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2021] NZDT 1657 APPLICANT NB APPLICANT TL RESPONDENT UQ Ltd The Tribunal orders: 1. UQ Limited is to pay NB and TL the sum of $30,000.00 on or by 10 August 2021. Reasons 2. NB and TL entered into an agreement (the contract) with UQ Ltd (UQ) for building repair work on NB and TL’s property at [Address]. NB and TL now b...
...If a claim is settled by agreement between the parties before the tribunal's determination is given, the tribunal— (a) must terminate the adjudication proceedings; and (b) if requested by the parties, may record the settlement in the form of a determination on agreed terms. [15] I do not accept that a claim can be settled by agreement when one party has objected to the terms of that agreement and refused to sign the deed of settlement. The claimants’ acceptance of...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 436 APPLICANT KB FIRST RESPONDENT K Ltd SECOND RESPONDENT Q Ltd c/o D Ltd The Tribunal orders: K Ltd is to pay KB $850.00 within 28 days. KB’s claim against Q Ltd is dismissed. Reasons [1] KB flew from [City 1] to [City 2] on a K Ltd flight on 27 December 2023. His checked-in bag was not...
...correct and dismissed Mr Jamieson’s appeal. The Corporation advised the Court that it wished to apply for costs and a timetable for the filing of submissions was fixed. Submissions have now been received from both parties.1 [2] The Corporation claims costs in the sum of $6,303 calculated on a 2B scale basis. Mr Jamieson opposes the application. 1 I understand that the Corporation’s submissions were filed outside of that timetable by a few days and Mr Jamieson oppose...