12542 items matching your search terms
(Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 205 APPLICANT UN Ltd RESPONDENT MI The Tribunal orders: MI is to pay $3130.56 to UN Ltd on or before 11 May 2023. Reasons 1. UN Ltd (‘UN’) provided an estimate to MI for the building work associated with a kitchen renovation at her house. MI had engaged a kitchen designer separately who had been contracted to design, supply and install the kitchen. 2.
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 112 APPLICANT in claim, Respondent in counterclaim BT RESPONDENT in claim, Applicant in counterclaim US The Tribunal orders: 1. US is to pay $1,500.00 to BT before 11 June 2023. 2. The counterclaim is dismissed. Reasons 1. BT engaged US to provide food platters, some drinks, and bar services at an agreed price of $2...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 265 APPLICANT CK and QK RESPONDENT XL The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons 1. On 21 December 2022, QK was driving North on [highway] between [village 1] and [village 2] when she lost control of the vehicle and crashed into the bushes on the side of the road, causing damage to her vehicle. The accident occurred on...
...August 2022 however, the goods become the property of SC and II, and they may dispose of them as they see fit. C. If any problems arise about the removal of the goods that the parties cannot resolve themselves, this can be raised by way of an application for a rehearing by either party limited to this issue. Reasons 1. II and SC wanted to build an extension on their house in about September 2021. A friend introduced them to FX, a builder. FX gave them a draft contract which S...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 86 APPLICANT L Ltd RESPONDENT B Ltd The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons 1. L Ltd runs a grocery shop as a member of the TW franchise group. B Ltd provides merchant card services to L Ltd, which allows L Ltd’s customers to pay for goods with credit cards and so forth. L Ltd runs a “click and collect” onlin...
BAY OF PLENTY DISTRICT HEALTH BOARD v DEBORAH CLIFF NZEmpC AUCKLAND [2015] NZEmpC 163 [18 September 2015] IN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT AUCKLAND [2015] NZEmpC 163 EMPC 179/2015 IN THE MATTER OF an application for leave to file a cross- challenge out of time BETWEEN BAY OF PLENTY DISTRICT HEALTH BOARD Applicant AND DEBORAH CLIFF Respondent Hearing: On the papers received on 25 August and 15 September 2015 Appearances: M Be...
...breach of Information Privacy Principle (IPP) 6 of the Privacy Act 2020 (PA) and an interference with his privacy. [3] One NZ denies that claim and say it had a proper basis under ss 47 and 53(c) of the PA to neither confirm nor deny whether it holds the requested information. [4] The claim was filed in October 2022, it has not, however, been able to be progressed because Dr Bevan-Smith has repeatedly failed to comply with Tribunal directions requiring him to file his written statement of evi...
...Co-ordination (NASC) organisation, which decides whether the client is eligible for Carer Support, whether Carer Support is an appropriate support option for the client and full-time carer, and the extent of the client’s eligibility. The NASC informs the client and full time carer about their carer support allocation and how the system works. They also inform the Ministry how many days per year it has allocated to a full-time carer for support. Once the Ministry receives notifi...
...for plaintiff E Shattock, agent for the defedant Judgment: 20 June 2014 COSTS JUDGMENT OF JUDGE CHRISTINA INGLIS [1] The plaintiff seeks an order of costs against the defendant. The costs sought are associated with an application for orders in respect of an earlier compliance order made by the Employment Relations Authority (the Authority). 1 The proceeding was set down for hearing but was subsequently vacated. [2] While the substantive proceeding has e...
...[2023] NZLCRO 154 Ref: LCRO 121/2023 CONCERNING an application for review pursuant to section 193 of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 AND CONCERNING a decision of the [Area] Standards Committee [X] BETWEEN AI Applicant AND HR Respondent DECISION The names and identifying details of the parties in this decision have been changed. Introduction [1] The applicant has applied for a review of a decision by the [Area] Standards Committe...