Search Results

1. BQ BQB v YJ Ltd [2015] NZDT 799 (1 June 2015) [pdf, 161 KB]

   ...assignee to demand rights more properly characterised as personal between the original insured and the insurer. [6] In considering any issues of interpretation in deeds or insurance policies the wording actually used must be considered. [7] The Applicants have explained that they consider the deed of assignment was comprehensive and have pointed to the wording used stating the assignment was of “all the Vendors’ rights, interests and title to the Claims and the resulting procee...

2. E Ltd v DM & KA [2023] NZDT 483 (23 June 2023) [pdf, 145 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 483 APPLICANT E LTD RESPONDENT DM SECOND RESPONDENT KA APPLICANT'S INSURER U Ltd The Tribunal orders: DM and KA, jointly and severally, are to pay the sum of $26,263.45 to E Ltd on or before 7 July 2023. Reasons: 1. DM had been an employee of E Ltd, and in 2020 returned to work for E L...

3. Defending a proceeding in the High Court

   ...associated fee through  File and Pay. This section outlines how you can defend the following types of proceeding in the High Court: Defending a general civil proceeding - someone wants to recover money or settle a dispute Defending an originating application Defending a civil appeal - someone has asked a senior court to reconsider a judge's decision Defending a bankruptcy notice - someone has applied to have you declared insolvent or unable to pay your debts Defending...

   Located in:

   1. Courts >
   2. Going to court >
   3. Going to court without a lawyer >
   4. Representing yourself in a civil case in the High Court

4. [2011] NZEmpC 57 Wade v Hume Pack-N-Cool Ltd [pdf, 113 KB]

   ...NZEmpC 57 [27 May 2011] IN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT AUCKLAND [2011] NZEmpC 57 ARC 74/07 IN THE MATTER OF an application to reinstate a challenge to a determination of the Employment Relations Authority BETWEEN ERROL WADE Applicant AND HUME PACK-N-COOL LIMITED Respondent Hearing: By memoranda of submissions filed on 20 July, 12 August, 15 and 22 October 2010 Counsel: Mark Donovan, counsel for applicant Kim Stretton, counsel for respondent...

5. L Ltd v I Ltd [2023] NZDT 197 (19 May 2023) [pdf, 172 KB]

   ...due to the urgency with which L Ltd wanted the job to be booked and undertaken – either party could CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 2 of 3 have waited until access to the site was available to determine whether or not the contract could be performed. As I do not regard the 50% part-payment as a deposit, and because a deposit is usually in the vicinity of 10% of the contract price, I consider a 10% deposit equivalent a reasonable amount to be retained by I Ltd. 8. I note that L Lt...

6. Bridson v Griffin [pdf, 29 KB]

   ...settlement with the claimant and that, because the other respondents have now reached a settlement with the claimant, they have no cross-claim against him and pursuant to s34 of the Act I therefore ORDER that he be struck out as a respondent. 2. Request to Record Settlement in Form of Determination 2.1 The terms of that settlement agreement between the claimant and the first and second respondents were discussed and presented to me and I was asked by all parties to record the...

7. GB v R Ltd [2021] NZDT 1653 (4 November 2021) [pdf, 174 KB]

   (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2021] NZDT 1653 APPLICANT GB RESPONDENT R Ltd The Tribunal orders: 1. The claim is struck out. Reasons: 1. In August 2019 GB and her partner flew from New Zealand to [City A] (via [City B]) on flights operated by R Ltd (R Ltd). GB says that on her flight from [City B] to [City A], while she was asleep, a food trolley hit her foot causing an injury to her foot. GB

8. [2018] NZSSAA 12 (28 February 2018) [pdf, 158 KB]

   ...WINZ seeking a Special Needs Grant (SNG). An email sent at 10.45 a.m from the Area Manager to other offices states that XXXX clients will be seen at XXXX, and other clients of the Ministry will be referred to other offices. The appellant’s application was not accepted and she was told to attend her ‘home office’ in XXXX because it was nearer to where she lived. It appears that the staff at the XXXX office considered they had more clients than they could manage at the time...

9. [2022] NZEmpC 189 Carver v Metallic Sweeping (1998) Ltd [pdf, 184 KB]

   ...OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH I TE KŌTI TAKE MAHI O AOTEAROA ŌTAUTAHI [2022] NZEmpC 189 EMPC 228/2021 IN THE MATTER OF a challenge to a determination of the Employment Relations Authority AND IN THE MATTER OF an application to strike-out or stay the proceeding and security for costs AND IN THE MATTER OF an application for leave BETWEEN PAUL ERIC CARVER Plaintiff AND METALLIC SWEEPING (1998) LIMITED Defendant H...

10. CEIT Practice Notes 2022 [pdf, 460 KB]

    ...Notes 2022 1 | P a g e Contents Introduction ........................................................................................................................................ 2 Chapter 1 - Commencing Claims ......................................................................................................... 3 Applications ..........................................................................................................................