Search Results

1. Paraone-Kawiti v Maori Trustee - Pukahakaha East 5B [2013] Chief Judge's MB 354 (2013 CJ 354) [pdf, 203 KB]

   ...the 19 March 2010 hearing on the day of the hearing; (b) Counsel for the advisory trustees' application was made without giving sufficient time or formal notice to the applicant, which did not grant him the opportunity to avoid the costs now claimed; (c) The applicant has unnecessarily incurred costs as a direct result of the advisory trustees actions and omissions as aforesaid; (d) The advisory trustees actions were unreasonable and disentitle them to be indemnified or reimb...

2. NQ v OS [2022] NZDT 109 (10 August 2022) [pdf, 91 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2022] NZDT 109 APPLICANT NQ RESPONDENT OS The Tribunal orders: 1. The claim is dismissed. Reasons: 2. In February 2022 OS’ garden shed was blown over his fence during a storm. It ended up flying across the road and hitting NQ vehicle, causing damage. NQ is claiming $4,378.20 for repairs to her vehicle. 3. The issues...

3. ET v XS [2020] NZDT 1450 (16 October 2020) [pdf, 99 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2020] NZDT 1450 APPLICANT ET RESPONDENT XS The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons 1. ET purchased Forex software from XS, who was acting as an agent for BQ, a US-based company, after communication between the two on a Facebook page for [Redacted] investors in New Zealand. ET became interested in forex trading us...

4. AG Ltd v SQ [2018] NZDT 1443 (30 October 2018) [pdf, 105 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2018] NZDT 1443 APPLICANT AG Ltd RESPONDENT SQ The Tribunal hereby orders: The claim by AG Ltd against SQ is dismissed. REASONS 1. On 28 August 2015, SQ and MN lent $500 from AG Ltd. Payments of $15 per week were made initially but were made less frequently in late 2015 and then stopped completely in 2016. AG Ltd se...

5. NX & QT v X Ltd [2023] NZDT 209 (28 April 2023) [pdf, 107 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 209 APPLICANT NX and QT RESPONDENT X Ltd The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons Did X Ltd breach the Fair Trading Act 1986 regarding advertised prices? 1. NX and QT have claimed that X Ltd has breached the Fair Trading Act 1986 (FTA). Their claim is that X Ltd offered prices for travel but fares were...

6. QH v KH [2020] NZDT 1467 (2 December 2020) [pdf, 188 KB]

   ...currently work and it is not known exactly when it stopped working. It is shown working in the marketing photos for the property. In the emails presented, the pool light is noted to be functioning on 12 June, 4 days before settlement. By 3 July QH had informed the real estate agents that it was not working. There is no further evidence as to when it failed. For these reasons I find that it is not proven on the balance of probabilities that the light failed prior to settlement. Therefore,...

7. N Ltd v R Ltd & TQ [2024] NZDT 418 (9 May 2024) [pdf, 185 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 418 APPLICANT N Ltd RESPONDENT R Ltd SECOND RESPONDENT TQ The Tribunal orders: TQ and R Ltd, jointly and severally, are to pay N Ltd $15,000 by 27 May 2024. If that full sum is not paid by the given date, TQ and R Ltd, jointly and severally, are ordered to pay N Ltd $25,126.35 by 28 May 2024. Reasons: 1. It is an undisput...

8. Cousins v Plaster Systems Ltd [pdf, 31 KB]

   ...encompass but are not limited by the narrower strike out criteria set out above. The Tribunal accepts the first respondent’s argument that the criteria for removal are analogous with but not identical to the principles applicable in strike out applications in the High Court/ District Court. 11. In coming to this conclusion the tribunal is following the decision of Justice Asher in Kells v Auckland City Council and ORS, High Court Auckland Registry CIV 2008-404-1812,30 May 2008...

9. [2018] NZEmpC 98 Ovation NZ Ltd v The NZ Meat Workers and Related Trades Union [pdf, 343 KB]

   ...WELLINGTON [2018] NZEmpC 98 [20 August 2018] IN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT WELLINGTON [2018] NZEmpC 98 EMPC 196/2018 IN THE MATTER OF proceedings removed in full from the Employment Relations Authority AND IN THE MATTER of an application for a verification order BETWEEN OVATION NEW ZEALAND LIMITED First Plaintiff AND TE KUITI MEAT PROCESSORS LIMITED Second Plaintiff AND THE NEW ZEALAND MEAT WORKERS AND RELATED TRADES UNION...

10. CV v IT [2023] NZDT 185 (31 July 2023) [pdf, 225 KB]

    CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 185 APPLICANT CV RESPONDENT IT The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Background 1. IT and FS contracted CV to erect a kitset [Supplier] cabin on their property in [Suburb]. 2. At that time CV’s details were listed on the “Find a builder or tradesperson” page on [Supplier]’s website. 3. CV ca...