Search Results

1. [2019] NZLVT 002 The Trustees of the Jiong Swee Family Trust v Auckland Council [pdf, 2.9 MB]

   IBEFORE THE ENVIRONMENT COURT I MUA I TE KOOTI TAIAO 0 AOTEAROA IN THE MATTER AND BETWEEN AND AND Decision No. [2019] NZEnvC OO.;t of the Resource Management Act 1991 of an application for costs by s 274 parties under s 285 of the Act AB LOGISTICS LIMITED (ENV-201-AKL-171) Appellant NORTHLAND REGIONAL COUNCIL Respondent COCAVO LIMITED, ELEVATE HEALTH AND FITNESS LIMITED, CONNECT, NZ COURIERS LIMITED, PERFORMA LINK, POST HASTE LIMITED, SURPLUS DIRECT LIMITED...

2. [2023] NZREADT 35 - UM v REAA (CAC 2103) (13 December 2023) [pdf, 226 KB]

   ...appellant: Self-represented Counsel for the first respondent: M Mortimer-Wang, A Stuart Counsel for the second respondent: R M Stewart, R H Anderson The third respondent: No appearance SUBJECT TO NON-PUBLICATION ORDER RULING (Applications for publication and non-publication orders) Dated 13 December 2023 2 INTRODUCTION [1] This matter concerns a complaint by UM, the appellant, against Ned Gow, a licensed salesperson under the Real Estate Agents Ac...

3. AI YK v LS [2021] NZDT 1709 (7 December 2021) [pdf, 222 KB]

   ...extended to the [property one] kitchen). 13. LS says that once the kitchens were installed (to the extent they were) AI and YK agreed at one point to her proposed values of $1900.00 (for [property two]) and $500.00 (for [property one]), but the applicants deny this. AI and YK have provided a third-party invoice that shows that the cost of the engineered stone bench-top alone exceeded these amounts so I consider it unlikely that they agreed to LS’s figures. CI0301_CIV_DCDT_...

4. [2020] NZREADT 19 - Singh - costs (1 May 2020) [pdf, 168 KB]

   ...behalf of the Committee and Mr Singh. The Tribunal did not hold a defended hearing. The Tribunal’s decision (dated 31 July 2018) was published on the Tribunal’s website on 3 August 2018.2 [7] On 10 July 2019, the Tribunal received an emailed request from Mr Edmondson, an attorney practising in the United States of America, for a copy of the Tribunal’s file for the proceeding. Mr Edmondson said that the facts of the proceeding had been part of the record in defamation procee...

5. Wai 3300, 2.6.011 Memorandum directions of Chief Judge Dr C L Fox following inquiry design judicial conference [pdf, 512 KB]

   ...claimants in their kōrero. Claim participation and eligibility 36. Crown counsel advised that the Crown had not yet conducted a thorough claim-by-claim analysis with respect to eligibility issues, in part to avoid an overly adversarial approach. Counsel requested the Tribunal and counsel to consider whether such a claim analysis was necessary or desirable at this stage, prior to the wānanga takiwā. 37. Several claimant counsel sought a further opportunity to file statements of claim for...

6. Taylor v Corrections (Costs) [2022] NZHRRT 45 [pdf, 97 KB]

   ...HEARING: Heard on the papers DATE OF SUBSTANTIVE DECISION: 20 October 2020 DATE OF DECISION OF COSTS: 24 November 2022 DECISION OF TRIBUNAL ON COSTS1 [1] The Tribunal by decision in Taylor v Department of Corrections (Strike-Out Application) [2020] NZHRRT 42 struck out Mr Taylor’s claim. Mr Taylor had failed to file any evidence and the claim was struck out as an abuse of process. [2] On 6 November 2020 the Department of Corrections (Corrections) filed an applica...

7. OJ & RJ v BX & KX [2023] NZDT 527 (29 October 2023) [pdf, 120 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2023] NZDT 527 APPLICANT OJ SECOND APPLICANT RJ RESPONDENT BX SECOND RESPONDENT KX The Tribunal orders: The claim by OJ and RJ is dismissed. The counter claim by BX and KX is dismissed. Reasons 1. The parties own neighbouring properties. OJ and RJ’s property sits at the rear of BX and KX’s property and is accessed via a d...

8. [2020] NZIACDT 28 - XA v Hill (29 June 2020) [pdf, 208 KB]

   ...2 INTRODUCTION [1] Ms Jennifer Ann Hill, the adviser, used an unlicensed employee within her office, her life partner, Mr Gu, to engage with her client, Ms XA, the complainant. Furthermore, Ms Hill lacked diligence in permitting incorrect information regarding the complainant’s work experience to be provided to Immigration New Zealand. [2] The complaint was referred by the Registrar of Immigration Advisers (the Registrar) to the Tribunal. It was upheld in a decision issued o...

9. Body Corporate 85760 Acme Apartments [2011] NZWHT Auckland 4 [pdf, 86 KB]

   1 [2011] NZWHT AUCKLAND 4 UNDER the Weathertight Homes Resolution Services Act 2006 IN THE MATTER of a reconsideration of the Chief Executive’s decision under section 49 CLAIM NO. 6368: BODY CORPORATE 85760 - ACME APARTMENTS, 6 HALLEY LANE, WELLINGTON ELIGIBILITY DECISION OF THE CHAIR OF THE WEATHERTIGHT HOMES TRIBUNAL The Claim [1] Body Corporate 85760 is the representative for a multi unit complex known as Acme Apartments at 6...

10. HM and X Ltd v TM [2021] NZDT 1638 (6 July 2021) [pdf, 201 KB]

    CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2021] NZDT 1638 APPLICANT HU RESPONDENT TM APPLICANT'S INSURER (if applicable) X Ltd The Tribunal orders: TM is to pay X Ltd $2,237.56 within 28 days. Reasons [1] HU and his insurer, X Ltd, represented by QL, claim from TM the cost of repairing HU’s car, which was damaged in a collision with a car driven by TM o...