Search Results

1. Re Dunstan (Rejection of Statement of Claim) [2023] NZHRRT 34 [pdf, 184 KB]

   ...DATE OF DECISION: 13 October 2023 DECISION OF TRIBUNAL THAT INTENDED STATEMENT OF CLAIM NOT BE ACCEPTED FOR FILING1 [1] On 19 April 2023, Ms Dunstan presented for filing in the Tribunal a statement of claim (on the official claim form) purportedly filed under s 98 of the Privacy Act 2020 (the Act). [2] The form on page 5 after Step 3 states: Please tick the boxes that apply to you (refer to the relevant Certificate or notice given by the Privacy Commissioner or [if a...

2. SM v D Ltd [2023] NZDT 155 (10 May 2023) [pdf, 229 KB]

   ...limits the ordered sum payable to GN to $1430.72 (of which the first $300.00 to be paid must be forward by GN to SM as per section 33 of the Dispute Tribunal Act 1988). Referee Perfect Date: 10 May 2023 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 at the time. If you wish to apply for a re...

3. P Ltd v UC [2024] NZDT 384 (29 May 2024) [pdf, 93 KB]

   ...absence of one or more of the parties. Has UC breached a legally binding contract? 5. When two parties reach agreement about an exchange for value, for example, the provision of services in exchange for money, a legally binding contract is formed. The terms of the contract are those that are agreed by the parties at the time the contract is formed. If written terms and conditions are to be binding upon the customer, the customer must have had access to the terms and conditions p...

4. [2025] NZLVT 028 – Edwards v Minister for Land Information (17 June 2025) [pdf, 406 KB]

   ...2021, confirmed the hearing date on or after 27 June 2022, noting that mediation had occurred. The Tribunal noted a dispute was clearly identified as to the law, namely the planning issues that affect the valuation of the matter. There followed requests to change the timetable, but the hearing date on or after 27 June 2022 was retained with a potential change to 4 July 2022. Special time was set aside in July 2022 for the hearing, namely 4-8 July and 11-12 July. The next Min...

5. Te Manutukutuku Issue 32 [pdf, 5.1 MB]

   ...• • • • • • • • • • • • • Concerns About Resource Allocation Available for Claims Concerns have been raised about the level of resources available to the Waitangi Tribunal for the hearing of claims. A large number of requests have been made for early and urgent funding and the Tribunal has been criticised when it has proceeded with other cases. In a recent memorandum concern­ ing the Ngai Tahu claim, Tribunal chairperson, Chief Judge Edward Durie p...

6. Stryder v Accident Compensation Corporation (Weekly Compensation) [2024] NZACC 68 [pdf, 285 KB]

   ...the initial medical assessment and the functional capacity evaluation was that Mr Stryder was fit for his pre-injury employment as a chef. Weekly compensation ceased on 18 October 2010. [12] On 21 May 2019, Mr Stryder's GP completed forms for assessing entitlement to a lump sum payment. The general practitioner noted Mr Stryder was suffering from PTSD and anxiety. Since these conditions were not covered injuries, he could not be assessed for a lump sum payment. However,...

7. Brunton v Accident Compensation Corporation (Treatment Injury) [2023] NZACC 187 [pdf, 382 KB]

   ...but needs to follow this up with regular doctor. IMP delusions P Review with concerns 22 Dec 2020 Dr John Aiken (JA) Offered f/u H pylori test, but declines. Continues to formulate hypothesis of a reaction to drugs given for endoscopy. Requests to complete ACC form for medical misadventure. Concerned about administration of fentanyl, and having biopsies. Decribes [sic] her symptoms as akin to 'vaccine reaction'. Feels like she has been 'microchipped' I at...

8. TM v B Ltd [2023] NZDT 228 (14 April 2023) [pdf, 93 KB]

   ...this question, which had not been apparent to either of them prior to the hearing. Given they were not legally represented, that is unsurprising and not a criticism. TM thought it was important to protect New Zealand consumers from misleading information such as that in B Ltd’s baggage policy. He further said that if the Tribunal did not have jurisdiction, he might be able to make a claim in [Country 1] following his return to [International city 1] later this year. NL for B Ltd was un...

9. IM v KE [2024] NZDT 301 (8 May 2024) [pdf, 183 KB]

   ...ACA). Therefore the Tribunal cannot hear a claim for loss of wages arising out of the second incident in the cafe where KE’s dog pulled out of IM’s hand. Referee: J.F. Tunnicliffe Date: 8 May 2024 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...

10. Hall v Auckland Council [2012] NZWHT Auckland 6 [pdf, 228 KB]

    ...whereas Mr Medricky and Mr Hadley were working in the construction industry at the relevant time therefore I prefer their evidence on this issue. [55] Mr Gillingham said that it was not common practice in 2000/2001 for a Council officer to request a Producer Statement from a roofer. He accepted that this placed more emphasis on the Council inspections. The Council was reasonably required to inspect an element of construction as crucial as the roof when it did not 21...