Search Results

Search results for claim form.

12542 items matching your search terms

  1. N Ltd v TC [2019] NZDT 1364 (25 September 2019) [pdf, 220 KB]

    CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2019] NZDT 1364 APPLICANT N Limited RESPONDENT TC APPLICANT'S INSURER (if applicable) R Insurance Limited The Tribunal hereby orders: TC is to pay the sum of $9550.10 directly to R Insurance Limited on or before 16 October 2019. Reasons 1. Mr X, driving a N Ltd vehicle, and Ms C were the drivers inv...

  2. AZ v S Ltd [2023] NZDT 268 (28 June 2023) [pdf, 179 KB]

    CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 268 APPLICANT AZ RESPONDENT S Ltd The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons: 1. In May 2021 AZ engaged S Ltd as her property manager, for her house in [suburb], while she was [overseas]. The property was tenanted until 4 July 2022. After the tenants moved out S Ltd and AZ’s friend carried out a final inspect...

  3. V Ltd v BS [2023] NZDT 695 (8 December 2023) [pdf, 154 KB]

    (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2023] NZDT 695 APPLICANT V Ltd RESPONDENT BS The Tribunal orders: BS is to pay V Ltd the amount of $26,318.75 on or before 23 January 2024. Reason 1. The dispute concerns insurance commissions and whether V Ltd can ‘clawback’ commissions from BS. BS was engaged as an independent contractor for V Ltd providing personal insurance to clients. Upon making a sale the insurer would p

  4. SX v A Ltd [2023] NZDT 462 (19 September 2023) [pdf, 204 KB]

    CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 462 APPLICANT SX RESPONDENT A Ltd The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons 1. SX had a new house built by [Company 1] trading as “HI” in 2004/2005. [Company 1] was removed from the Companies Register in 2011 and [Company 2] had been trading as HI for some time. 2. A Ltd, which ha...

  5. Director of Human Rights Proceedings v INS Restorations Ltd [2012] NZHRRT 18 [pdf, 88 KB]

    ...discovered that, without her knowledge, the shares and directorship had been transferred to someone else, she addressed a request to the company for access to all 2 the personal information held by the company about her. In particular, she requested the share transfer form, the notice of resignation as director and corresponding Board resolutions. The company made no response. Extraordinarily, the day prior to the hearing before the Tribunal, she reappeared on the New Zealand Com...

  6. Murphy v Ministry of Social Development (Extension of time) [2017] NZHRRT 15 [pdf, 139 KB]

    ...Regulations 2002 provides that a defendant who intends to defend proceedings must, within 30 days after the day on which the notice of proceedings is served on him or her, file in the office of the Tribunal a statement of reply to the plaintiff’s claim and must serve a copy of the statement of reply on the plaintiff and any other party. [2] By memorandum dated 12 April 2017 the Ministry of Social Development has sought an extension of time for filing its statement of reply until 12 Ma...

  7. Director of Human Rights Proceedings v Corrections (Extension of Time) [2017] NZHRRT 16 [pdf, 139 KB]

    ...Regulations 2002 provides that a defendant who intends to defend proceedings must, within 30 days after the day on which the notice of proceedings is served on him or her, file in the office of the Tribunal a statement of reply to the plaintiff’s claim and must serve a copy of the statement of reply on the plaintiff and any other party. [2] By memorandum dated 19 April 2017 the Chief Executive of the Department of Corrections has sought an extension of time for filing his statement of...

  8. NT v OX & B Ltd [2023] NZDT 476 (2 May 2023) [pdf, 248 KB]

    ...NT SECOND APPLICANT OX RESPONDENT B Ltd The Tribunal orders: B Ltd is to pay the sum of $1,822.67 to NT and OX on or before Tuesday, 23 May 2023. The balance of the claim is dismissed. REASONS 1. On 8 October 2022, the Applicants, NT and OX (together referred to as “the Applicants”), booked to fly with the Respondent, B Ltd, from [city 1] to [city 2] (via [city 3]) on 21 December 2022. B Ltd was operating the [city 1] to [city 3] leg, and X Ltd was operatin...

  9. W v EQC [2020] CEIT-2020-0039 [pdf, 175 KB]

    IN THE CANTERBURY EARTHQUAKES INSURANCE TRIBUNAL CEIT-0039-2020 IN THE MATTER OF CANTERBURY EARTHQUAKES INSURANCE TRIBUNAL ACT 2019 BETWEEN C W Applicant AND EARTHQUAKE COMMISSION Respondent Date: 18 March 2021 ___________________________________________________________________________ DECISION OF C P SOMERVILLE [JURISDICTION] ____________________________________________________________...

  10. X Ltd v K Ltd [2019] NZDT 1339 (19 December 2019) [pdf, 252 KB]

    CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 5 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2019] NZDT 1339 APPLICANT X Ltd RESPONDENT K Ltd The Tribunal orders: 1. K Ltd is to pay to X Ltd the sum of $456.78 on or before 10 October 2019. Reasons 1. X Ltd (X Ltd) contracted K Ltd (K Ltd) to supply bottled lubricant for resale to clients in the medical industry. As part of the supply, K Ltd was to attach pre-printed...