12939 items matching your search terms
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2023] NZDT 677 APPLICANT SL RESPONDENT QU The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons: 1. In February 2022, SL purchased a used imported [vehicle] advertised as having 57,100 km, for $20,600.00. 2. SL claims $23,269.74, being a refund of the purchase price and the balance in costs he says are associated with the maintenance and...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2022] NZDT 250 APPLICANT NN RESPONDENT IQ The Tribunal orders: IQ is to pay NN $1500.00 by 22/12/2022 Reasons: 1. NN was offered a [car] from her friend IQ for $3500. They discussed aspects of the car and the deal and NN took it for a short test drive. 2. IQ told her the CV joint was faulty and she would have it replaced the...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2022] NZDT 218 APPLICANT SI RESPONDENT NI SECOND RESPONDENT DI The Tribunal orders: a. The claim against NI was withdrawn at the start of the hearing and is dismissed. b. DI is to pay to SI $6,500.00 by 16 January 2023. Reasons: 1. Today’s hearing was a rehearing of the dispute which means it starts afresh fr...
...Respondent (Nicola Boyd removed) AND CRAIG TIBBITS Second Respondent AND ALAN BOLDERSON Third Respondent AND MICHAEL GREGORY MAY Fourth Respondent DECISION ON COSTS Adjudicator: S Pezaro 18 January 2011 Page | 2 APPLICATIONS FOR COSTS [1] Craig Tibbits, the second respondent, seeks an award of costs against Blake Boyd, the first respondent. Alan Bolderson, the third respondent, and Michael May, the fourth respondent, apply for an order of c...
IN THE DISTRICT COURT AT WELLINGTON I TE KŌTI-Ā-ROHE KI TE WHANGANUI-A-TARA [2024] NZACC 083 ACR 199/22 UNDER THE ACCIDENT COMPENSATION ACT 2001 IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL UNDER SECTION 162(1) OF THE ACT BETWEEN GRAHAME SAVAGE Applicant AND ACCIDENT COMPENSATION CORPORATION Respondent Submissions: Applicant is self-represented H Ifwersen and R Hindriksen for respondent Hearing: On the papers J...
2013 Chief Judge's MB 272 IN THE MAoRI LAND COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AOTEA DISTRICT Hearing: A20090004324 CJ2009/9 UNDER Section 45, Te Ture Whenua Maori Act 1993 IN THE MATTER OF Mura Rattenbury BETWEEN CORRIENE FISHER Applicant AND 8 October 2012 (Heard at Wellington) NEVILLE FISHER Respondent Appearances: Coniene Fisher, Applicant Judgment: 22 May 2013 DECISION OF CHIEF JUDGE W W ISAAC 2013 Chief Judge's MB 273 Introduction [1] This application, fi...
...one expert was not being called shortly before the hearing commenced. Experts met only during the hearing period. If documentation had been prepared on time an experts‟ conference before the hearing may have been possible and would have informed the assessor of the differing views contrary to his. This would have especially applied once he was advised as to the application of Xypex coating in lieu of paint or plaster. Calderbank letter [11] In August 2008 all the responde...
...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...
...[2024] NZLCRO 069 Ref: LCRO 13/2024 CONCERNING an application for review pursuant to section 193 of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 AND CONCERNING a decision of the [Area] Standards Committee [X] BETWEEN OB and HG Applicants AND NC Respondent The names and identifying details of the parties in this decision have been changed. DECISION Introduction [1] The applicants, Ms OB and Mr HG, have applied for review of a decision by t...
...same interest in the subject matter of the proceedings as she does. The same point is made with regard to the fourth plaintiff. [26] Two supporting affidavits have been filed. A representative of each of the two unions produced copies of the applicable rules, together with a form which members are required to sign, stating that the relevant union is authorised to act as the members’ representative in all matters relating to the members’ employment. [27] Health NZ opposes th...