12924 items matching your search terms
Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 438 APPLICANT Q Ltd RESPONDENT B Ltd The Tribunal orders: 1. The claim by Q Ltd is dismissed. 2. BH Ltd is added as the respondent. Reasons: 1. B Ltd is the trading name of BH Ltd (referred to in this decision as B Ltd). 2. On 10 January 2023, Q Ltd provided two specialist driver training courses, one for UE and the other for...
Page 1 of 2 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2023] NZDT 785 APPLICANT DN RESPONDENT 2nd RESPONDENT WM Ltd FN Ltd The Tribunal orders: 1. The claim is dismissed. Reasons: 2. The matter had been adjourned after the last hearing for the parties to consider a settlement. That did not occur, and I am now making a determination. 3. DN (‘the applicant’)...
IN THE DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2013] NZDT 371 BETWEEN AGO APPLICANT AND ZVE RESPONDENT Date of Order: 12 December 2013 Referee: Referee Blyth ORDER OF THE DISPUTES TRIBUNAL The Tribunal hereby orders that AGO’s claim be dismissed. Facts [1] The material facts are that AGO became a flatmate of ZVE in June 2013. AGO left in late August 2013. AGO claims that ZVE owes her a refund of $180.00, being on...
...circumstances [5] The proceedings against PwC under the Privacy Act [14] The interlocutory applications filed by Ms Guo [15] PWC – THE DISCOVERY APPLICATION [21] The Tribunal’s power to order discovery [21] Pleadings – the statement of claim [25] Pleadings – the statement of reply [27] Assessment – the issues which will determine the scope of discovery [28] Whether formal discovery should be ordered [32] Reasons for formal discovery being ordered [36] Use of discov...
...that appeared to be required. DM and IW filed a claim in the Disputes Tribunal. 2. This is a claim for breach of the guarantee that services are to be provided with reasonable care and skill, as set out in the Consumer Guarantees Act 1993. The Applicants estimated that the repairs would cost about $38,000.00 plus GST, and they claimed the maximum claimable in the Tribunal, $30,000.00. 3. The issues to be determined were as follows: a. Has HD completed the work to the required...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2023] NZDT 649 APPLICANT TN RESPONDENT K Ltd The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons 1. TN owns a [vehicle]. 2. In 2022 the vehicle suffered an engine failure. K Ltd re-built the engine for TN. The job cost $14,012.97 and was completed in October 2022. 3. TN had re-located to [country] for work. He asked his frie...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 429 APPLICANT UJ RESPONDENT TV The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed Reasons: 1. UJ purchased a used car from TV. The car was advertised on [the Internet], and UJ messaged TV about it. They arranged a time to view the car, and UJ’s wife went, and test drove the car. UJ then purchased the car. Shortly afterw...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2023] NZDT 727 APPLICANT I Ltd RESPONDENT K Ltd The Tribunal orders: K Ltd trading as ML must pay I Ltd $2,507.68 by 4pm on 22 January 2024. Reasons: 1. The parties rent their respective premises from the same landlord and share a power meter which is on I Ltd’s premises, meaning I Ltd is primarily responsible for the costs of the power. The...
...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 rehearing, you can apply online, download a form from the Disputes Tribunal website or obtain an application form from any Tribunal office. The application must be lodged within 20 working days of the decision having been made. If you are applying outside of the 20 working day timeframe, you must also fill out an Application for Reheari...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 94 APPLICANT TX RESPONDENT QC Ltd The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons: 1. In January 2022, TX purchased a used car from QC Ltd. In August 2022, it broke down and had to be towed to TX’s home. An ECU fault was diagnosed. TX was told that the pins had corroded causing the fault, and that the corro...