13020 items matching your search terms
1 [2012] NZWHT AUCKLAND 22 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. 6853: ROGER GEORGE PROCTER, PAULINE JANICE PROCTER AND GEOFFREY LEONARD PROCTER – 31 The Crowsnest, Whitby, Porirua ELIGIBILITY DECISION OF THE CHAIR OF THE WEATHERTIGHT HOMES TRIBUNAL [1] Roger, Pauline and Geoffrey Procter are the owners of a property a...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2021] NZDT 1697 APPLICANT LI RESPONDENT WH Ltd APPLICANT'S INSURER (if applicable) DBJ Ltd The Tribunal orders: 1. WH Ltd is to pay LI $2,000.00 on or before 7 December 2021. Reasons: 1. In or around July 2021, LI purchased a vehicle from someone in [City 1] via Trademe. LI engaged the services of WH Ltd to...
...Introduction [1] This matter arises out of an appeal from the decision of a Reviewer dated 18 October 2022. The Reviewer dismissed an application for review of the Corporation’s 13 January 2022 decision declining cover in relation to Mr Ratima’s claim that he suffered treatment injury by reason of being incorrectly diagnosed with schizophrenia in 2010. [2] On 20 October 2022, Mr Ratima filed a Notice of Appeal against the Reviewer’s decision of 18 October 2022, with an acc...
Minute Book: 75 RUA 155 IN THE MAORI LAND COURT HAMILTON Hearing: Judgment: A20060024560 75 RUATORIA MB 155-166 UNDER Section 19(1)(b) ofTe Ture Whenua Maori Act 1993 IN THE MATTER OF Wharekahika A13 Block - Potaka Marae Ex parte application Chambers, Hamilton 21 September 2006 JASONKOIA Applicant DECISION OF JUDGE S TE A MILROY [1] Mr Koia applied for an injunction pursuant to section 19(1)(b) of Te Ture Whenua Maori Act 1993 ("the Act") to prevent the tr...
...Compensation Corporation [2014] NZSC 2431. 6 Howard v Accident Compensation Corporation [2017] NZACC 76. 4 [25] It is of serious concern that precious court resources continue to be taken up in advancing essentially the same argument in different forms. This litigation may justify an application under s 166 of the Senior Courts Act 2016, which is intended to restrain the unwarranted and vexatious use of the court process for cases that have no merit. … [27] The Corporation...
IN THE DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2013] NZDT 351 BETWEEN AFG FIRST APPLICANT AND AFH SECOND APPLICANT AND ZUO Ltd RESPONDENT Date of Order: 17 November 2013 Referee: Referee Stewart ORDER OF THE DISPUTES TRIBUNAL The Tribunal hereby orders that AFH is joined as an Applicant. ZUO Ltd is to pay AFG and AFH the sum of $3120.0 within 7 days from the release date of this decision. Facts [1] ZUO Ltd
...BEFORE THE ACCIDENT COMPENSATION APPEAL AUTHORITY R Bedford HEARING at Wellington on 7 & 9 November 2012 APPEARANCES/COUNSEL Mr J Miller for appellant Mr P McBride for respondent DECISION Introduction [1] The appeal is brought as a form of class or representative action under the aegis of the named appellant and 20 other appellants in respect of retrospective claims for backdated attendant care payments under the 1972 and 1982 Acts. [2] At the Authority’s direct...
...(the Registrar), the head of the Immigration Advisers Authority (the Authority). He rejected a complaint about fees made by the appellant, Mr R (D) A against a licensed adviser, Ms R (M) U. [2] The appellant was unable to proceed with a residence application, so the adviser did not have to complete all the contracted work. A dispute arose between them as to the level of fee refund offered by the adviser. An unusual feature of the circumstances giving rise to the complaint is that...
...wished to migrate to New Zealand and approached her. They say: [1.1] Ms Yerman agreed to provide immigration services for a fee, payable before they left South Africa for New Zealand. [1.2] Ms Yerman assessed their eligibility to migrate from a form they completed. They then met with Mr Yerman, Ms Yerman’s husband; he is not a licensed immigration adviser. He advised the Bisschoffs that Mr Bisschoff’s occupation was not on the list of qualifications that allow migration to New Zeal...
...Limited v Auckland Council IN THE ENVIRONMENT COURT AT AUCKLAND I TE KŌTI TAIAO O AOTEAROA KI TĀMAKI MAKAURAU Decision [2024] NZEnvC 266 IN THE MATTER OF an appeal under s 120 of the Resource Management Act 1991 AND IN THE MATTER OF applications for costs under s 285 of the Resource Management Act 1991 BETWEEN MCCALLUM BROS LIMITED (ENV-2022-AKL-121) Appellant AND AUCKLAND COUNCIL Respondent Court: Judge J A Smith Judge A H C Warren Hearing: On the...