Search Results

1. KT & others v ON & UN [2019] NZDT 1564 (6 March 2019) [pdf, 208 KB]

   ...23. LQ is liable to ON for $1365.65. 24. In summing up ON and UN are liable to LQ for $940.00 and LQ is liable to ON $1365.00. This means LQ is to pay ON $425.00. Referee: C Murphy Date: 6 March 2019 Page 4 of 4 Information for Parties Rehearings You can apply for a rehearing if you believe that something prevented the proper decision from being made: for example, the relevant information was not available or a mistake was made. If you wish to app...

2. [2015] NZEmpC 92 Hally Labels Ltd v Powell [pdf, 426 KB]

   ...judgments and Court of Appeal decision [29] The restraint of trade [37] Categories of documents and behaviour which would amount to breach [42] Documents accessed – discussion (a) Tutty documents (b) Allegation relating to customer data and information which Mr Powell accessed from his computer for customers for whom he no longer had responsibility (c) Allegation that Mr Powell accessed sensitive files relating to Hally’s budget and business records [47] [47]

3. Defend a challenge or a claim

   You need to defend a challenge or a claim within the time stated under the heading Notice to defendant of the statement of claim which has been served on you. Documents: statement of defence File and serve a statement of defence using Form 4. Your statement of defence needs to comply with regulation 19 and 20 of the Employment Court Regulations 2000:1 list the full name, address and occupation of each party involved.  If the claim is a challenge those names should be identical to the...

   Located in:

   1. Employment Court >
   2. What to expect at the Employment Court

4. CX-v-XC-Law-Firm-2015-NZDT-885-16-July-2015 [pdf, 118 KB]

   ...reached at mediation. CX signed the mediation settlement on 11 March and confirmed it the following day, but has subsequently sought to challenge it and continue with an appeal. [4] XC Law Firm have invoiced $5,045.55 for these services and CX requests a declaration of non-liability for that amount and for contractual interest added. XC Law Firm claim contractual interest of $1,068.97 to the date of the Tribunal hearing and submitted a counter-claim for payment of $5,742.47 inclu...

5. AAF and AAG v ZZU [2010] NZDT 45 (26 February 2010) [pdf, 71 KB]

   ...property; (ii) any damage or injury to any, property; and (iii) the recovery of any property. [9] The Injury Prevention Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Act 2001 gives the Accident Compensation Corporation exclusive jurisdiction over claims for damages arising directly or indirectly form personal injury. [10] The claim falls outside the jurisdiction of the Tribunal. [11] The Applicants have requested a refund of the filing fee. That is an administration cost and...

6. UC and NT Family Trust v TT Ltd [2020] NZDT 1497 (11 August 2020) [pdf, 137 KB]

   ...therefore would have made a windfall. 6. KC says they had a settlement and referred to email exchanges between UC and TT Ltd. I have considered the email exchanges and find that there was a settlement. Settlement agreements do not need to be formal. In particular the email from TT Ltd to UC dated 30 April 2020 saying they accept the abatement amounts offered being; 0% for Outgoings at all Alert levels 60% for days in Alert level 4 $115.70 + GST per day 15% for days in Alert level...

7. XT v TT & C Ltd [2024] NZDT 622 (24 July 2024) [pdf, 286 KB]

   ...with a pre-accident valuation of $120,000.00. Mr XT sold the vehicle for $70,000.00, leaving a shortfall of $50,000.00. It said it was entitled to recover the repair cost (the amount it paid out). 15. On 10 May 2022, B Ltd provided Mr TT with information from the assessor and offered a settlement. 16. On 13 June, Mr TT replied: Without prejudice B Ltd initial email May 31st 2021 which I took offense to, which took on a deceptive flavour. The email received is not factual and bor...

8. FZ v KU [2022] NZDT 164 (26 September 2022) [pdf, 215 KB]

   ...clinic and after discussion, was operated on by KU and others to remove the lump. After the surgery the wound broke down. FZ decided to euthanise Monty. They have brought a claim against KU because they believe that they were not given enough information prior to the surgery and wasted money having the lump removed. They also claim that they were misled about the cost of the surgery. They have claimed $4,000.00 which is less than the cost of the surgery as compensation. 2....

9. U Ltd v D Ltd [2023] NZDT 652 (27 November 2023) [pdf, 200 KB]

   ...sum of $15,631.37. This includes interest [see paragraph 8) above] of $688.37. The counterclaim by D Ltd, and the claim by the U Trust, are both dismissed. Referee: GP Rossiter Date: 27 November 2023 Page 3 of 3 Information for Parties Rehearings You can apply for a rehearing if you believe that 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 reh...

10. Wise v Commissioner of Police [2020] NZHRRT 44 [pdf, 169 KB]

    ...OF TRIBUNAL1 [1] Ms Wise is a former employee of the New Zealand Police (Police). Ms Wise was made redundant from the Police on 6 February 2015. After concluding her employment with the Police Ms Wise made a number of information privacy requests leading up to an information privacy request dated 19 June 2018 which is the subject of this claim. [2] Ms Wise did not receive a response to her information privacy request until 29 August 2019, which was after she had filed her claim...