12924 items matching your search terms
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2023] NZDT 694 APPLICANT MD RESPONDENT UI The Tribunal orders: UI is to pay directly to MD the sum of $4,800 on or before 31 January 2024. Summary of Reasons: [1] The hearing was convened by teleconference. Both parties appeared at the hearing. [2] The parties agree the essential facts. The applicant loaned the respondent $4,800 in early 2...
...TRIBUNAL [2015] NZDT 829 BETWEEN DB APPLICANT AND WY LIMITED RESPONDENT Date of Order: 22 April 2015 Referee: Referee Haronga ORDER OF THE DISPUTES TRIBUNAL The Tribunal hereby orders that both the claim and counter claim are dismissed. Reasons [1] The applicant DB was granted a rehearing of his claim on the basis that the sole respondent was WY Limited. WY Limited then lodged a counterclaim. Before today’s hearing, I discovered t...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 547 APPLICANT ES RESPONDENT T Ltd The Tribunal orders: Both applications are struck out. Reasons: 1. On 4 July 2017, T Ltd were cutting poplar trees on ES’s property when a large branch fell onto the roof of a silo belonging to ES. That same day T Ltd made a claim with their insurer, W Ltd, for the damage and W Ltd appoi...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 12 APPLICANT BX RESPONDENT F Ltd The Tribunal orders: 1. BX’s claim against F Ltd is dismissed. 2. BX must pay F Ltd $160.00 by 4pm on 13 March 2024. Reasons: 1. The applicant parked in a carpark monitored by the respondent on 21 August 2023 and received a parking ticket for unauthorised parking for an amount of $160.00....
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2023] NZDT 630 APPLICANT PI RESPONDENT NQJ SECOND RESPONDENT XB The Tribunal orders: The claim is struck out. Background 1. In August 2019, PI was contacted by MX (a vet based in [Town]) to assist with de-stocking animals at a local farm owned by NQ. 2. NQ was elderly and in poor health. NQJ became involved due to concerns about...
...(Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 286 APPLICANT GN RESPONDENT MX APPLICANT'S INSURER (if applicable) B Ltd The Tribunal orders: The claim by GN against MX is proved. MX is to pay B Ltd the sum of $20,493.59 on or by 5:00 pm on 21 August 2023. Reasons 1. On 21 October 2023 the car driven by MX drove into the back of GN’s parked car around 4:30 am causing damage. GN’s...
(Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2021] NZDT 1419 APPLICANT RESPONDENT DX RESPONDENT APPLICANT I Ltd The Tribunal orders: 1. I Ltd’s claim against DX is dismissed. 2. DX’s claim for non-liability is upheld. Reasons 1. In December 2016 DX telephoned I Ltd to book a service for a car. On 2 December 2016 I Ltd’s technician came to DX’s address and provided a quote for the work...
...new matters that have arisen since the HCAs. 5. ND Ltd also argued that the 2 claims should be 3 separate claims as they involve 3 separate lot owners, US and DF jointly, KG separately and HK separately and that those lot owners should be the Applicants for those claims. 6. The hearing was adjourned for the second claim, [redacted], to be split, KG to be joined as an Applicant under this file number and a separate new claim to be filed for HK, which subsequently became [redacted]....