Search Results

1. [2022] NZACC 140 – Beauchamp v ACC (15 July 2022) [pdf, 250 KB]

   ...“failure to issue decisions” following the SRNA report of 24 May 2020. On 8 October 2020, the Corporation’s issued a substantive decision on Ms Beauchamp’s matters. A week later, nine of the review applications were withdrawn. Ms Koloni requested costs in respect of 12 review applications lodged. On 28 October 2020, the Corporation awarded Ms Beauchamp costs totalling $166.35. [24] The Corporation, in its costs decision, purported to act in terms of section 148(3) of t...

2. BL v JN Ltd [2023] NZDT 162 (7 June 2023) [pdf, 231 KB]

   ...162 APPLICANT BL RESPONDENT JN Ltd The Tribunal orders: JN Ltd is to pay the sum of $1,600.00 to BL on or before Wednesday, 28 June 2023. REASONS 1. In December 2022, JN Ltd placed an advertisement on [online selling platform] for the sale of a 2011 [redacted] caravan (“the Caravan”) at an asking price of $42,000.00. JN Ltd was selling the Caravan on behalf of its customer, IU. IU wanted the Caravan gone, so asked JN Ltd to reduce the asking price. By March...

3. Employment Court forms & fees

   Our filing and hearing fees have increased by 3.65% from 1 July 2025.   On this page: Information about fees in the Employment Court Ways to file documents and pay filing fee Information about forms in the Employment Court Frequently used forms Other forms Forms used when serving a defendant overseas (other than in Australia) Forms for a case involving a defendant in Australia (and the Trans-Tasman Proceeding Act 2010 Applies If you can't access these forms Information about fees in the E...

   Located in:

   1. Employment Court

4. P Ltd v V Ltd [2024] NZDT 377 (15 May 2024) [pdf, 178 KB]

   ...this case, CJ had contacted P Ltd about possible drainage damage, and asked P Ltd for assistance. It was agreed between UI and CJ on 1 November that P Ltd would arrange an inspection, which was carried out on 14 November. A week later, CJ asked for information, and P Ltd replied that it had identified damage that required repair and was preparing an [insurer] report. On 5 December, UI asked CJ for the details of the owner of the property so that it could prepare an [insurance] claim and, ha...

5. Parohinog v Yellow Pages Group Ltd (Strike-Out Application No 2) [2015] NZHRRT 14 [pdf, 91 KB]

   ...Criminal Matters”, detailed an alleged stalking incident at a parking building in Hamilton, revisited her difficulties with the Family Court, spoke of her problems in the High Court regarding her dispute with her aunt, Diwa Feck and concluded with a request the Tribunal inspect the photographs attached to the application: 13. Please your Honour, see the attached photos of the Organised Crime of Covert Electronic Assault Stalking and Surveillance New Zealand, Stalking, Gangstalking, Har...

6. QS v T Ltd [2024] NZDT 703 (15 August 2024) [pdf, 115 KB]

   ...CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 4 of 5 pump failure in October, but as stated in the earlier findings, that is not the sort of event for which T Ltd would be able to establish a timeframe/identify a responsible guest. 24. I cannot see any basis from the information and evidence presented on which T Ltd would have liability to pay for or contribute to pump replacement and/or pump repairs. Partial refund of property management fees 25. Given that the above claims have not succeed...

7. MQ v HQ [2021] NZDT 1659 (14 July 2021) [pdf, 99 KB]

   ...reasons, the claim for compensation sought by MQ is not granted but a work order and alternative money and access orders are made on the terms stated. Referee: Malthus - DTR Date: 14 July 2021 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...

8. OJ & RJ v BX & KX [2023] NZDT 527 (29 October 2023) [pdf, 120 KB]

   ...discussing the erection of a fence along part of the boundary between the properties with OJ’s partner. While BX and KX thought that negotiations were amicable it became apparent this was not the case. OJ’s partner advised that they required a formal notice to be served on them under s.10 of the Fencing Act 1978 (the FA). BX and KX did this and were responded to with a cross notice. Further notices were exchanged but without agreement being reached as to the fencing work required to be...

9. ET and JT v F Ltd [2021] NZDT 1639 (13 July 2021) [pdf, 197 KB]

   ...within a couple of days. On 24 January, BS emailed again, saying that the submission would be submitted by 31 January. By this time, ET and JT had lost confidence in the ability of F Ltd to complete the work in accordance with its promises, and informed F Ltd on 28 January 2020 that they were cancelling the contract. [6] ET and JT paid two invoices, totalling $10,420.73, sent by F Ltd as work went on. Subsequently, they received an invoice for $18,828.38 from F Ltd, dated 27 January 20...

10. FT v BF Ltd [2023] NZDT 793 (20 December 2023) [pdf, 231 KB]

    ...$13,643.10 by the date stated in the order. The counter claim by BF Ltd for damages is dismissed, and the claim for the removal of the veranda is struck out. Referee: K Rendall Date: 20 December 2023 Page 5 of 5 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 rehe...