Search Results

1. E Ltd v XL [2024] NZDT 563 (9 July 2024) [pdf, 239 KB]

   ...of section 29 of the CGA by E Ltd. 24. Accordingly, I do not find that any further amount is payable to E Ltd. 25. The claim is, therefore, dismissed. Referee: S Malaviya Date: 9 July 2024 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...

2. ZQN Apartments TRI 2021-100-001 Procedural Order 9 [pdf, 225 KB]

   ...accepted that an application for removal or strike out should only be made as a preliminary issue where a claim is so untenable in fact and law as to be unlikely to succeed. [12] The Tribunal’s approach to removals has been to consider whether the claims against a prospective party are tenable. In Saffioti v Jim Stephenson Architect Ltd, Katz J cautioned against removing parties at a preliminary stage in circumstances where the claims asserted against them are tenable, but weak.2...

3. SR v GI [2016] NZDT 1070 (17 February 2016) [pdf, 274 KB]

   ...coffee machine money and the plastics, neither of these arrangements were intended to give rise to legally binding obligations. The parties made their arrangements loosely as friends on a basis of personal trust and reciprocity, where each of them performed favours for the other and expected favours in return, without any monetary value being put on these favours or clear terms being negotiated or recorded. [9] Mr SR stated that he wanted to get back what is his because Mr GI cut hi...

4. Enviro NZ Services Ltd v Accident Compensation Corporation (Work-Related Personal Injury) [2025] NZACC 111 [pdf, 290 KB]

   ...Work-Related Personal Injury, ss 28, 30 Accident Compensation Act 2001] [1] The appellant, Enviro NZ Services Limited (Enviro NZ), appeals a review decision upholding the Corporation’s decision to grant cover for a shoulder sprain suffered by the claimant, Brian Dellow in a work-related accident. [2] Enviro NZ disputes that a work-related injury occurred. [3] The Corporation’s position is that it had sufficient evidence to accept the claim. [4] The Court was informed that Mr D...

5. Brown v Otago Polytechnic and Progressive Enterprises (Recusal Application) [2014] NZHRRT 5 [pdf, 82 KB]

   ...making unfavourable decisions. Mr. Haines adjudication of my complaints amounts to transparent violations of my Civil Rights and the Crimes Act, and therefore it is only fitting that Mr. Haines stand down as adjudicator of my complaints. Mr Brown requested to give particulars of his complaint [11] As it was not clear whether this letter was a complaint in relation to the Otago Polytechnic proceedings (HRRT003/13) or those against Progressive Enterprises Ltd (HRRT004/13) or both, the...

6. KK & PM v S Ltd & SH Ltd [2023] NZDT 43 (23 January 2023) [pdf, 265 KB]

   ...professional, despite black pipes being present and the house being constructed during the period when those pipes were used. CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 3 of 7 13. KK and PM submitted that at the very least the report should have informed them of the possibility that some of the pipes may have been the original Dux Quest piping that was prone to splitting and leaking, both along the pipe and also at the joins. 14. EQ agreed that he would notify his client of the presenc...

7. LCRO 184/2015 WD v YR (6 July 2017) [pdf, 171 KB]

   ...[30] The application for review was not withdrawn and in October 2016 Mr WD provided a “Complete statement for LCRO hearing” which was forwarded to Mr YR.20 [31] No further comment was received from Mr YR, and in November 2016 this Office requested consent from both parties for the review to be completed on the material to hand. Both parties provided their consent and the review was scheduled for completion on the papers.21 [32] On 27 February 2017 this Office received a docum...

8. WHT - Chair's directions for lower value claims [pdf, 174 KB]

   Weathertight Homes Tribunal Chair’s Directions for lower value claims page 1 of 5 CHAIR’S DIRECTIONS (for Lower Value Claims) 1. Introduction 1.1 These directions are effective from 14 September 2015 and are issued pursuant to s 114 of the Weathertight Homes Resolution Services Act 2006 (the Act) and set out the procedure which is to apply to all applications in the Weathertight Homes Tribunal where the amount claimed is under $20,000 (lower value claims). 2. How the...

9. WHT Claims under $20k - Chair's Directions [pdf, 174 KB]

   Weathertight Homes Tribunal Chair’s Directions for lower value claims page 1 of 5 CHAIR’S DIRECTIONS (for Lower Value Claims) 1. Introduction 1.1 These directions are effective from 14 September 2015 and are issued pursuant to s 114 of the Weathertight Homes Resolution Services Act 2006 (the Act) and set out the procedure which is to apply to all applications in the Weathertight Homes Tribunal where the amount claimed is under $20,000 (lower value claims). 2. How the...

10. [2016] NZEmpC 109 Dotcom v Orduna [pdf, 148 KB]

    ...proceedings under EMPC 86/2016 are Mr Dotcom’s cross-challenge to the same determination of the Authority issued on 11 March 2016 as to the matters found against him by the Authority. The allegations, admissions and denials in the pleadings likewise form the background to document disclosure issues. [6] At the heart of these proceedings are the questions of whether Mr Dotcom was the employer; and, if so, whether the individual parties were disadvantaged or dismissed unjustifiably...