Search Results

1. CQ and others v JT [2023] NZDT 744 (14 December 2023) [pdf, 224 KB]

   ...not separated by an adequate boundary fence are responsible for sharing the costs of an adequate fence. Does the Tribunal have jurisdiction to hear this matter? 8. The Disputes Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to hear every claim that is filed. Its jurisdiction is limited by the Disputes Tribunal Act 1988 and statutes which specifically grant the Tribunal jurisdiction such as the Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 and the Fencing Act 1978. Therefore, the Tribunal does have jurisdicti...

2. BS & OS v PB & UQ [2023] NZDT 271 (6 June 2023) [pdf, 120 KB]

   ...dispute because he was not successful in his exam, requiring him to repeat the course. The claim against PB is for $3,422.00 and UQ for $2,227.00, together with an additional $2,750.00 for the cost of the course OS was required to repeat, and the filing fee for the claim in the Disputes Tribunal. 3. The issues to be decided were as follows: a. Have PB and UQ breached the terms of a legally binding contract, and if so, which terms were breached? b. If the terms were breached, hav...

3. BU & DQ v NN [2023] NZDT 281 (17 July 2023) [pdf, 105 KB]

   ...a new flatmate from 19 November 2022 and the lease was changed. That flatmate did not actually move in however or pay rent. The Applicants asked NN to pay her share of the rent and other expenses that was unpaid, but NN did not pay. The Applicants filed a claim in the Disputes Tribunal. NN filed a counterclaim. 2. This is a claim for unpaid rent, expenses and damages for stress in the sum of $15,000.00 by the Applicants. NN’s counterclaim, apart from denying the Applicant’s claim,...

4. HD v NN [2023] NZDT 331 (3 August 2023) [pdf, 217 KB]

   ...6. HD also says that NN made an application for a restraining order against him and he had to incur significant legal costs to defend that. He seeks an order that NN is liable to pay his legal costs. 7. Finally HD seeks an order that NN pay the filing fee for this claim. The claims that NN caused damage to HD’s property 8. The law that applies is the law of tort, under which a person can be liable for damage caused as a result of wrongful interference with the property of anot...

5. BI v ID [2024] NZDT 806 (13 September 2024) [pdf, 113 KB]

   ...number or email. ID did not send his email address as promised, and stopped responding to BI’s calls online. BI eventually found ID’s parents address that is publicly available through social media and brought a claim to the Tribunal. 3. BI filed a claim seeking compensation for the damage to his vehicle on the basis that he believes ID caused the collision and is liable for the damage to his car. BI gave evidence that his car was not economical to fix and had been written off...

6. UC & SM v BC [2024] NZDT 445 (9 May 2024) [pdf, 207 KB]

   ...wages due to extra 17 hours 40 minutes in transit – UC $ 538.46 h. Cost of travelling back to [City 2] to recoup one days missed holiday $ 2,500.00 i. Time spent dealing with BC to seek compensation $ 135.00 j. Reimbursement of Tribunal filing fee $ 90.00 k. Lost wages due to attending Tribunal hearing – UC $ 269.00 l. Lost wages due to attending Tribunal hearing – SM $ 385.00 $ 7,786.92 3. Since UC and SM filed their claim BC has reimbursed th...

7. Chen v Gu-Chang [2013] NZIACDT 16 (19 March 2013) [pdf, 221 KB]

   ...complaint alleges that the professional relationship was not established in accordance with the Licensed Immigration Advisers Code of Conduct, the excessive fees were not refunded, there was a failure to report properly and they did not return the file when required. [6] The issues are primarily factual matters. The Tribunal has found the allegation of gross overcharging made out; that it was done so dishonestly and the fees were not returned. However, this occurred before Ms Gu-Chang...

8. Cook v Manawatu Community Law Centre [2021] NZHRRT 10 [pdf, 261 KB]

   ...WINZ to Ms Cook. Ms Cook says she neither knew about, nor authorised, Ms Abraham’s approach to WINZ for that information. [4] The second request to WINZ for information about Ms Cook was on 3 March 2017. At that time Ms Cook was on leave, having filed two personal grievance claims against MCLC. A wide range of Ms Cook’s personal information was requested by Ms Abraham. Once again, Ms Cook says she knew nothing about this request and certainly did not authorise it. [5] In the ca...

9. [2015] NZEmpC 39 Scarborough v Micron Security Products Ltd [pdf, 126 KB]

   ...counsel for the defendant and the Authority member.” Judge Perkins also drew Miss Scarborough’s attention to the fact that the timeframe for filing any additional interlocutory applications had expired. [7] Prior to hearing Miss Scarborough filed a document entitled “Brief of Evidence”. In a minute issued on 9 February 2015 I noted that, while carrying this description, it appeared to be a further application to have the matter referred back to the Authority for investigat...

10. Broadman - Waimarama 3A 4B Sec 5 (2018) 66 Tākitimu MB 207 (66 TKT 207) [pdf, 332 KB]

    ...Tākitimu MB 282-286 dated 5 April 2017 (Heard at Hastings) Appearances: Judgment: Walter Broadman and Mere Kokiri-Tamanui in person 28 February 2018 JUDGMENT OF JUDGE L R HARVEY Introduction [1] In May 2012, Walter Broadman filed financial reports and minutes of an annual general meeting in relation to the Waimarama 3A4B Sec 5 trust. Those records disclosed possible issues with the administration of the trust, including: (a) a lack of financial recor...