Search Results

1. GQ Ltd v OD Ltd [2022] NZDT 126 (19 August 2022) [pdf, 234 KB]

   ...caused during the tenancy and not a figure to improve the tenancy, for instance the quote to clean carpet preferred to the quote to replace carpet. Referee: P McKinstry Date: 19 August 2022 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...

2. NL v EU & TJ Ltd [2021] NZDT 1589 (2 August 2021) [pdf, 102 KB]

   ...liable for 80% of EU’s loss, which equates to $5,312.13. EU is liable for 20% of NL’s loss, which is $1,000.00. The balance payable by NL is $4,312.13. Referee: J P Smith Date: 2 August 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...

3. XN v LD & S Ltd [2023] NZDT 62 (17 January) 2023 [pdf, 196 KB]

   ...of any such actions by the applicant in this case and the fact a third party gave possession of the car to the first respondent is not enough to transfer title to the car. 7. The first respondent argued that he had checked publicly available information about the car and saw that it was not reported as stolen and there was no money owing on the car, and therefore was of the view that KG had a right to sell the car. However, at the point that the car was sold to the first respondent, t...

4. D Ltd v KL [2023] NZDT 684 (21 December 2023) [pdf, 119 KB]

   ...$1500.00 on or before Tuesday 30 January 2024. Reasons: 1. KL’s car had been vandalised and in lieu of write off he had settled with his insurer and was restoring it. In April 2022 he engaged D Ltd (the company) to spray paint the car and to perform some repairs, and paid $8212.15. KL provided the second hand parts, being two front fenders and four doors. 2. The company claims $1962.50 for legal costs. 3. KL claims $17,212.16, increased at the hearing from $8211.15. This...

5. Waitangi Tribunal Annual Report Matariki 2022 to 2023 [pdf, 18 MB]

   ...Waitangi Tribunal Unit staff, 2023 11THE WAITANGI TRIBUNAL - ANNUAL REPORT MATARIKI 2022 – 2023 ii) Registrarial – this team analyses claims submitted to the Tribunal for registration. It responds to pub- lic enquiries to undertake search requests for properties that may be subject to section 27B memorials under the State-Owned Enterprises Act 1986, completes section 49 reports for Legal Aid, and assesses applica- tions that the Tribunal recommend land no longer be liable to res...

6. BORA Maungaharuru-Tangitū Hapū Claims Settlement Bill [pdf, 286 KB]

   ...articles 14 and 27 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which are comparable to sections 20 and 27 (2) of the Bill of Rights Act. [4] Exclusion of Remedy of Compensation - clauses 30(3) and 34(3) 10. Clause 30(3) excludes any form of monetary compensation as a remedy for any failure of the Crown to comply with Te Kawenata (a partnership agreement between MTI and the Crown applying to a specified area). Clause 34(3) is a similar provision excluding any form of...

7. Taylor v Department of Corrections (Strike-Out Application) [2020] NZHRRT 42 [pdf, 137 KB]

   ...DATE OF DECISION: 20 October 2020 DECISION OF TRIBUNAL STRIKING OUT CLAIM1 [1] In 2014, while in prison, Arthur Taylor sent a letter to Brian Hunter. The letter was withheld by the Department of Corrections (Corrections). Mr Taylor requested that the letter be returned to him, however this request was refused by Corrections. Mr Taylor complained to the Privacy Commissioner. The Privacy Commissioner concluded there was a breach of information privacy principle (IPP) 6 a...

8. Berry v Rondel LCRO 130 / 2011 (26 April 2012) - Penalty Decision [pdf, 143 KB]

   ...that he did not protect Ms Berry’s interests when making arrangements to insure the property. 7) That Mr Rondel was in breach of Rules 7 and 7.1 in failing to report to Ms Berry following completion of the transaction. [3] In that decision, I requested that the parties provide submissions as to penalty orders and publication, which both parties have now done. Mr Rondel is now represented by Mr AK who has been appointed by Mr Rondel’s insurer. [4] Prior to reconvening the hear...

9. HM v F [2023] NZDT 445 (29 August 2023) [pdf, 205 KB]

   ...31 December 2022 without giving her any warning? b) If so, what is HM’s loss? Has F breached its contract with HM by cancelling her 115,189 Points on 31 December 2022 without giving her any warning? 4. Parties to a contract must perform their respective obligations. If they do not, they will be in breach and need to account for any loss caused to the other party to the contract. CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 2 of 3 5. HM refers to F’s customary practice of sending...

10. HB v Q Ltd [2024] NZDT 582 (26 August 2024) [pdf, 173 KB]

    ...is no basis to consider an award of compensation. Therefore, it is not necessary to consider the second issue. 9. In summary, the claim is dismissed. Referee: Sara Grayson Date: 26 August 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 reh...