Search Results

1. EM v EI Ltd [2024] NZDT 366 (26 June 2024) [pdf, 175 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 366 APPLICANT EM RESPONDENT EI Ltd The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. [1] EM signed up for a [diving course] with EI Ltd, represented by managing director SD. For various reasons, EM was unable to complete the course. He claims a refund from EI Ltd of the price that he paid. [2] The documents provided showed that EM signed a docum...

2. [2022] NZEmpC 191 McDermott v Employment Relations Authority [pdf, 172 KB]

   ...v EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS AUTHORITY [2022] NZEmpC 191 [25 October 2022] IN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND I TE KŌTI TAKE MAHI O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU [2022] NZEmpC 191 EMPC 172/2022 IN THE MATTER OF an application for judicial review AND IN THE MATTER OF an application for costs BETWEEN JOHN McDERMOTT Applicant AND EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS AUTHORITY First Respondent AND EMPLOYSURE LIMITED Second Resp...

3. LP v MT LCRO 74/2013 (22 October 2014) [pdf, 78 KB]

   ...November after a telephone call from Ms LP, and again by Ms NQ on 24 November. [15] On 24 November the mortgagee’s solicitor replied: “Our client was not obliged to assign the EQC claim to your client. Therefore they have declined your client’s request to have the EQC claim assigned.”4 [16] A file note by Ms NQ indicates that she discussed this with Mr MT on 28 November. Mr MT agreed that the mortgagee’s solicitor was correct and that Ms LP should take a pragmatic appro...

4. KV v FT [2023] NZDT 481 (23 August 2023) [pdf, 182 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 481 APPLICANT AND RESPONDENT IN THE COUNTERCLAIM KV RESPONDENT FT APPLICANT IN THE COUNTERCLAIM LU APPLICANT IN THE COUNTERCLAIM’S INSURER X Ltd The Tribunal orders: 1. FT is to pay KV $2000.00 on or before 5pm on 23 September 2023. 2. The counterclaim is dismissed. Reasons...

5. MD & IL v F Ltd [2023] NZDT 201 (2 May 2023) [pdf, 167 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 201 APPLICANT MD and IL RESPONDENT F Ltd The Tribunal orders: F Ltd is to pay $1700.00 to MD and IL on or before 30 May 2023. Reasons 1. MD and IL engaged F Ltd to supply and install a new kitchen/laundry in their home at a contract price of around $17,000.00. They moved out of their home into rented accommodation while...

6. MD & IL v F Ltd [2023] NZDT 201 (2 May 2023) [pdf, 167 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 201 APPLICANT MD and IL RESPONDENT F Ltd The Tribunal orders: F Ltd is to pay $1700.00 to MD and IL on or before 30 May 2023. Reasons 1. MD and IL engaged F Ltd to supply and install a new kitchen/laundry in their home at a contract price of around $17,000.00. They moved out of their home into rented accommodation while...

7. C Ltd v HQ [2024] NZDT 602 (4 July 2024) [pdf, 127 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 602 APPLICANT C Ltd RESPONDENT HQ The Tribunal orders: HQ is to pay C Ltd $19,901.86 on or before 1 August 2024. Reasons 1. C Ltd had built a dwelling on HQ’s property pursuant to a contract between the parties. The final invoice was rendered for the sum of $46,500.59 but only $26,598.73 was paid. When he paid the final amount, th...

8. NX v T Ltd & S Ltd [2024] NZDT 234 (8 March 2024) [pdf, 187 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 234 APPLICANT NX RESPONDENT T Ltd SECOND RESPONDENT S Ltd The Tribunal orders: T Ltd and S Ltd are to pay NX $120.00 by Friday 29 March 2024. Reasons: 1. NX, along with his wife, XX as his support person, HF representing T Ltd, and TJ representing S Ltd, all attended the hearing by teleconference. 2. NX bought a kit...

9. OX v PM Ltd [2020] NZDT 1331 (22 June 2020) [pdf, 498 KB]

   ...was unable to make a finding that any assurances had been made of a refund that were breached. Mr X presented a case from 2018 in which PM was fined for failing to properly advise its customers of their CGA rights. This case was regarding other claims, and resulted from a prosecution under the Fair Trading Act 1986 (FTA) that would be outside the Disputes Tribunal’s jurisdiction to pursue. I was not able to infer from these breaches that PM could be liable in this case. 27. Howeve...

10. DN v DD Ltd [2022] NZDT 61 (28 June 2022) [pdf, 218 KB]

    CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2022] NZDT 61 APPLICANT DN RESPONDENT DD Ltd APPLICANT'S INSURER (if applicable) QJ Ltd Attn: KB RESPONDENT INSURER (if applicable) RJ Ltd Attn: MN The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons 1. On 9 February 2021 DN had engaged ND to construct a glass balustrade on the deck of his [V...