Search Results

1. IH v DD Ltd [2021] NZDT 1624 (12 July 2021) [pdf, 187 KB]

   ...retrieve in time. CU provided photographs as well, and said that the goods were “rubbish” and not worth anything. IH was not entirely clear regarding which goods were retrieved and which were not, and there is inadequate evidence to justify the value claimed, especially allowing for wear and tear. However, I am satisfied that IH did lose some items of value, and find that she is entitled to recover $500.00 as compensation. What sum, if any, is payable between the parties? 18. If the...

2. Guidelines for Conferences in the Canterbury Earthquakes Insurance Tribunal [pdf, 166 KB]

   ...prepare for case management conferences (CMC) in the CEIT and to assist understanding of the CEIT case management process. The CEIT uses a case management system which differs from the District and High Courts. The CEIT Member appointed to your application will handle every aspect of the application. This ensures that your application will be closely managed. Decisions will be made to ensure that the pathway to resolution is as speedy, flexible and cost-effective as possible. First...

3. [2022] NZEnvC 148 Cable Bay Wine Limited v Auckland Council [pdf, 1 MB]

   ...MATIER OF BETWEEN AND AND IN THE MATIER OF BETWEEN AND Decision [2022] NZEnvC 148 an appeal under s 120 of the Resource Management Act 1991 CABLE BAY WINE LIMITED (ENV-2018-AKL-010) Appellant AUCKLAND COUNCIL Respondent an application under s 316 of the Resource Management Act 1991 AUCKLAND COUNCIL (ENV-2018-AKL-017) Applicant CABLE BAY WINE LIMITED AND MOTUKAHA INVESTMENTS LIMITED Respondent Court: Alternate Environment Judge L J Newhook, sitting alo...

4. IM Ltd v HI [2023] NZDT 566 (30 November 2023) [pdf, 106 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2023] NZDT 566 APPLICANT IM Ltd RESPONDENT HI The Tribunal orders: HI is to pay the sum of $6,653.78 to IM Ltd on or before Tuesday 19 December 2023. Reasons: 1. In April 2022, HI engaged IM Ltd to provide legal advice regarding a dispute with the [redacted] District Council, and IM Ltd emailed HI a letter of engagement attaching its...

5. NI v C Ltd [2024] NZDT 412 (22 April 2024) [pdf, 183 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 412 APPLICANT NI RESPONDENT C Ltd The Tribunal orders: C Ltd is to pay NI $400.00 on or before 17 May 2024. Reasons 1. This is a dispute about the costs of transporting a tractor-style ride-on lawn mower from [City 1] to [City 2]. The dispute arose because the dimensions of the mower given to C Ltd to price the cost of transport were incorre...

6. E v G [2023] NZDT 32 (10 February 2023).pdf [pdf, 209 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 32 APPLICANT E RESPONDENT G The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons 1. E purchased a used boat engine from G having seen it advertised on [Online auction site]. He contacted G, inspected the engine, and a purchase price of $8000 was agreed which he paid on 1 June 2022. E collected the engine...

7. [2021] NZEmpC 230 Allison v Ceres New Zealand LLC [pdf, 175 KB]

   ...Authority, discontinuing proceedings in the Authority seeking compliance, and not seeking costs associated with steps taken in this proceeding to that point in time. There was no response to that offer. [6] Mr Allison does not oppose an order but has requested it be for a lesser amount than Ceres claimed. Ms Oberndorfer, Mr Allison’s advocate, accepted that the calculation provided by Ceres complied with the Court’s Guideline Scale. A deduction was sought, however, because...

8. TR v NI LCRO 109 / 2011 (21 February 2013) [pdf, 199 KB]

   LCRO 109/2011 CONCERNING an application for review pursuant to section 193 of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 AND CONCERNING a determination of Auckland Standards Committee 3 BETWEEN TR Applicant AND NI Respondent The names and indentifying details of the parties in this decision have been changed. Introduction [1] TR has applied for a review of a determination by Auckland Standards Committee 3 in respect of a complaint by him...

9. Gwak & Kim TRI-2020-100-006 Procedural Order 5 [pdf, 223 KB]

   IN THE WEATHERTIGHT HOMES TRIBUNAL TRI 2020-100-006 BETWEEN JUNG SOOK GWAK & JOSEPHINE YEON JU KIM Claimants AND YAN SUN First Respondent (Removed) AND ALASTAIR COUPER Second Respondent AND AUCKLAND COUNCIL Third Respondent (Removed) AND LAI FOOK CHOY Fourth Respondent PROCEDURAL ORDER 5 (Application for removal by first respondent) Dated: 25 February 2022 2 Introduction [1] The claimants owned a leaky home at...

10. HB v ST [2024] NZDT 178 (29 February 2024) [pdf, 92 KB]

    CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 178 APPLICANT HB RESPONDENT ST The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons 1. HB bought a [brand] ride on mower with 546 hours use from ST for $7,500.00 on [online auction site] using buy now. He understood it was 5 to 6 years old, however on the day he picked it up, ST told him he bought it 9 years ago. He also unders...