12540 items matching your search terms
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2022] NZDT 192 APPLICANT FH APPLICANT QK RESPONDENT WI Incorporated The Tribunal orders: 1. The claim by FH for $1,600.00 damages is dismissed. 2. QK is to pay WI Incorporated the sum of $645.64 on or before 5pm on 25 November 2022. Reasons 1. On or about 9 July 2022 FH was issued with an invoice for $623.92 by...
...Legal Aid Services 4 Legal services for proceedings before the Waitangi Tribunal 4 Settlement negotiations and associated activities 5 Other Court or Tribunal processes outside the Waitangi Tribunal 5 Non-Tribunal activities 6 Direct funding of claimants 6 Watching briefs 6 Goodwill/relationship maintenance 6 Mediation 6 Applications for and grants of legal aid 7 General 7 Eligible proceeding 7 Eligible applicant 7 Financial eligibility 8 Justification for aid 8 Re...
...AND AUCKLAND CITY COUNCIL Second Respondent AND BERNARD MOHAN Third Respondent AND PAUL BAYER (Removed) Fourth Respondent DECISION ON COSTS Adjudicator: S Pezaro BACKGROUND [1] On 8 October 2008 I granted applications for strike out by the first respondent, Argon Construction Limited’s (“Argon”), and the second respondent, Auckland City Council (“the Council”). Argon and the Council have applied for costs and I now determine these
...next day to file a report in person, and DE raised a claim with U Limited (the insurer) once they had the police report details for the claim. 2. One month later, on 10 and 11 March, the insurer’s investigations team interviewed each of the applicants. On 10 May, the insurer notified the couple that their claim had been declined. The insurer subsequently cancelled three of the couple’s other five insurance policies, including their home and contents insurance. 3. The applicants...
IN THE DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2012] NZDT 437 BETWEEN AGT Ltd APPLICANT AND ZTV RESPONDENT Date of Order: 8 August 2013 Referee: Referee Reuvecamp ORDER OF THE DISPUTES TRIBUNAL The Tribunal hereby orders that the claim and the counter claim are struck out. Material Facts [1] The applicant company claims that it is owed $16,926.50 (including an amount of $7,526.25 for additional work done) by way of...
...Mr NC to purchase Mr NC’s property at [Town]. The Agreement “was entered into after a damaging sequence of earthquakes struck Canterbury, commencing on 4 September 2010”.2 [4] The Agreement contained the following clause 18:3 18.0 EQC Claims The Vendor and Purchasers agree to the following if the property becomes (or already is) subject to an EQC claim or insurance claim relating to earthquake damage (The claim) prior to the settlement date. (a) Advise the Purchaser of the...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 75 APPLICANT J Ltd RESPONDENT KG The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Summary of Reasons: [1] The hearing was convened by teleconference. Both parties appeared at the hearing. [2] The applicant claims debts under a credit contract assigned to it on 21 September 2021 by I Ltd. In its application the applica...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 229 APPLICANT L Ltd RESPONDENT CT The Tribunal orders: The application is dismissed. Summary of Reasons: [1] The hearing was convened by teleconference. NS represented the applicant. CT represented himself. [2] The applicant claims the return of an amount paid to [restaurant] plus damages following its cancellation of a...
...Court before 1 January 2018, sections 62B and 65A of the District Courts Act 1947 will still apply If you started your case in the High Court before 1 January 2018, the old section of the Judicature Act 1908, section 87 will still apply. Please note: an application to vary an attachment order is not a new enforcement application. On this page: Interest calculated for cases started prior to 1 January 2018 Interest on civil debt is calculated differently after a judgment order has been granted...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 504 APPLICANT EQ RESPONDENT B Ltd The Tribunal orders: The claim is struck out. Reasons: 1. In December 2016, EQ consulted B Ltd about her hair loss, and signed a contract to get a glued- on wig at a cost of $4,361.00. The wig was fitted on 21 March 2017. EQ immediately experienced burning to her scalp but thought it wo...