Search Results

1. [2022] NZACC 88 – Pol v ACC (12 May 2022) [pdf, 284 KB]

   ...an email to the Corporation, attaching a letter from Mr Pol, dated 25 May 2020. The letter was addressed to the chief executive officer (“CEO”) of the Corporation and listed various complaints about the management of his claim as well as a request for an “out of scope payment” to compensate Mr Pol for the suspension of his weekly compensation in September 2019, over and above the payment of backdated weekly compensation and interest which he had already received. [31] On...

2. Waitangi Tribunal - issue 52 of Te Manutukutuku [pdf, 348 KB]

   ...“process had replaced protest”. The Waiheke settle- ment was another return of land follow- ing the Waiheke Report in 1987. Mäori Agencies Established The 1980s saw the establishment of two core Mäori agencies. The Mäori Language Commission was formed after the release of the Te Reo Report of 1986. This report provided impetus for a number of initia- tives to strengthen the Mäori language including passage of the Mäori Language Act 1987 that established Mäori as an offi-...

3. TT v BF & Ors [2023] NZDT 147 (22 March 2023) [pdf, 124 KB]

   ...after TT took back the keys to the house. 6. The Management Agreement also states clearly (second page, second column, first paragraph) that “We (TT’) indemnify the agent against all actions, claims and costs arising out of the proper performance of the agents duties as the property manager or the exercise of any powers duties or authorities contained in this management authority” 7. Based on the evidence put before me which included detailed photographic evidence, and...

4. BU v B Ltd [2023] NZDT 158 (20 June 2023) [pdf, 93 KB]

   ...intention as to the future. 7. BU claims that when he first asked about the car, he did advise that he had a large family, including five kids and needed a big family car. He recalls asking if the car was a seven seater. 8. BU presented the LTSA information that came with the car, which stated interior was a 7 seater. CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 2 of 3 9. Mr Q said that at no point during the presale did BU ask about the car’s seating capacity, that is whether it is a fiv...

5. BN v MH [2024] NZDT 102 (8 February 2024) [pdf, 93 KB]

   ...BN’s claim because he has not been able to prove he owned the fence, and therefore cannot prove he has suffered damage or destruction of his property. Referee: J.F. Tunnicliffe Date: 8 February 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 re...

6. OT v F Ltd [2024] NZDT 399 (2 July 2024) [pdf, 93 KB]

   ...(Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 399 APPLICANT OT RESPONDENT F Ltd The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons: 1. In 2020 OT purchased a used [performance car] from [dealership] in [City 1]. After travelling 8,000kms and within the three year warranty period, he discovered the water pump was leaking. He took the vehicle to BN, the [dealer] in [City 2], who could not find any coolant leak

7. BMN v Stonewood Group Ltd [2024] NZHRRT 64 [pdf, 324 KB]

   ...office Vicki Chow, Executive Director at Stonewood, removed BMN’s work laptop, personal USB flash drive (the USB) and personal cellphone from his desk at the Stonewood office. One week later BMN’s employment was terminated. [2] Despite requests Stonewood did not return BMN’s personal information that they had collected from him. [3] BMN claims Stonewood has interfered with his privacy by collecting his personal information in breach of the Privacy Act 1993 (the Act).3 [...

8. HG v HN Ltd [2019] NZDT 1471 (28 August 2019) [pdf, 133 KB]

   ...Tribunals Act 1988). CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 3 of 4 Conclusion 17. For these reasons HN Ltd is to pay HG the sum of $137.61 by the date stated in the order. Referee: K Rendall Date: 28 August 2019 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 or a mistake was made. If you wish...

9. NQ v QC [2023] NZDT 328 (19 July 2023) [pdf, 118 KB]

   ...fee could be higher than the outer range of the estimate depending on the time spent and the outcome. 10. I note too that Rule 9.4 of the Lawyers & Conveyancers Act (Lawyers Conduct & Client Care) Rules 2008 requires a lawyer to “inform the client promptly if it becomes apparent that the fee estimate is likely to be exceeded”. There is no evidence to support that QC Ltd told NQ that the fee is likely to exceed (by some considerable margin) the fee estimate in the terms of...

10. GM v Q Ltd [2024] NZDT 722 (22 August 2024) [pdf, 98 KB]

    ...under Q Ltd’s [reference]. 2. The claim by Q Ltd against GM is dismissed. Reasons Introduction 1. On 11 March 2024, GM (‘GM’) parked in the car park of N Ltd. She was in the park for approximately seven minutes. In May 2024, GM received information from Q Ltd that she had been in breach of using the park and had been sent a breach notice and three reminder notices. GM seeks an order that she is not liable to Q Ltd for the breach and cumulative fees to the value of $320.00.