12554 items matching your search terms
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 5 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 287 APPLICANT KQ APPLICANT LT RESPONDENT SG APPLICANTS’ INSURER J Ltd The Tribunal orders: SG is to pay KQ and LT $4,405.65 on or before Friday 7 July 2023. Reasons: 1. KQ and LT own a home in [City]. SG previously occupied the adjoining property. KQ and LT say that in October 2021 SG damaged the brick b...
...2018 the Tribunal made two orders in favour of Dr Naidu: [1.1] A declaration that there had been an interference with the privacy of Dr Naidu by the refusal by the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons (RACS) to provide access to personal information requested by Dr Naidu under IPP 6. 1 [This decision is to be cited as: Naidu v Royal Australasian College of Surgeons (Costs) [2018] NZHRRT 33] 2 [1.2] A compliance order requiring RA...
...B Background [1] When these proceedings were filed on 19 July 2013 Mr McCreath was then a prisoner detained at Christchurch Men’s Prison. He alleges that while so detained he was the subject of gender discrimination and his statement of claim cites the Minister of Corrections as first defendant and the Chief Executive of the Department of Corrections 2 as second defendant. The two nurses responsible, in part, for his treatment (Nurse A and Nurse B) are cited as third an...
...CONTENTS BACKGROUND ............................................................................................. 4 Matters the Tribunal must decide ................................................................ 4 Mr and Mrs Sen’s application to join Mr Redpath ........................................ 5 The amount claimed ................................................................................... 5 ARE THERE DEFECTS CAUSING LEAKS AND DAMAGE OR LIKELY FUTURE DAMA...
...of misconduct, a finding that only the Tribunal could make, and also noting that the Applicant had failed to respond or comply with a requirement pursuant to s 147(2)(a) to produce for the Committee’s inspection certain documents that had been requested. Review application [11] The grounds cited by the Applicant for review were bias, procedural unfairness, error in fact and law, wrong in determining the matter reached the necessary threshold of the New Zealand Law Society Discip...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 5 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2023] NZDT 650 APPLICANT HG RESPONDENT N Ltd Order of the Tribunal 1. N Ltd is to pay $14,428.50 to HG by 20 December 2023. 2. The amount ordered includes the deduction of $2,080.00 the applicant owes for N Ltd delivery charges and $300.00 for storage of a TV and Chair. Reasons 1. The issues to be determined in this case are:...
...Claimant AND ARGON CONSTRUCTION LIMITED First Respondent AND AUCKLAND CITY COUNCIL Second Respondent AND BERNARD MOHAN Third Respondent AND PAUL BAYER (Removed) Fourth Respondent DECISION ON STRIKE OUT APPLICATIONS Dated 8 October 2008 BACKGROUND The strike out applications [1] This decision follows a hearing on 2 September 2008 to determine strike out and removal applications by the first respondent Argon Construction...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 5 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2021] NZDT 1576 APPLICANT HN RESPONDENT FH Limited The Tribunal orders: That the Application is dismissed. Reasons: 1.On the 3rd of January 2021, HN booked 3 tickets at @$175 each for a total $525 with FH Ltd (FH) to be an ”On the Water Spectator America’s Cup Match” for Saturday the 13th of March 2021 departing @...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 348 APPLICANT XD RESPONDENT KA The Tribunal orders: KA is to pay XD $1,500.00 on or before 21 July 2023. Reasons: 1. XD bought a fish from someone advertising on [online website]. He now wishes to return the fish and obtain a refund. 2. The first hearing of this claim was set down to be heard by teleconference...
...regarding having a large format digital billboard placed on its premises at [location]. 2. On 21 June 2023 W Ltd provided to Z Ltd, by email, the estimated costs for gaining resource consent. UV for Z Ltd responded, by email, ‘yes please proceed the application’. 3. W Ltd claims $8,790.17 from Z Ltd made up as follows: a. Invoice 0551 dated 31 August 2023 $ 5,631.55 b. Invoice 0552 dated 31 August 2023 $ 2,139.00 c. Invoice 0559 dated 29 September 2023 $ 839.62...