Search Results

1. ND v KQ [2024] NZDT 631 (24 September 2024) [pdf, 187 KB]

   ...the bottom of the candle shape and are not of the quality she requires or expected. 2. ND wishes to return the candles and claims compensation of $127.00. 3. KQ stands by the quality of the candles saying they are produced in beeswax and are formed within a mold. KQ says she has offered to exchange the candles, but this is not what ND wants. 4. The Issues to be resolved are: a. Were the candles of acceptable quality? b. If not, has KQ complied with her obligations under the...

2. IH v QM [2024] NZDT 389 (5 June 2024) [pdf, 101 KB]

   ...(Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 389 APPLICANT IH RESPONDENT QM The Tribunal orders: QM is to pay IH the sum of $11,948.00 on or before 26 June 2024. Reasons: 1. QM listed a [car] on [platform] for $1.00 reserve. 2. IH bid on the auction. Shortly before the auction ended the two highest bids were removed, leaving IH the winner of the auction. 3. IH was concerned about the late removal of the two highest bids and ask...

3. TN & UX v N Ltd [2025] NZDT 81 (2 April 2025) [pdf, 180 KB]

   ...money had been stolen. N Ltd advised TN and UX in a meeting on 7 November 2025 that their wedding would not be able to be hosted by it, unless they paid their deposit again. The applicants were accused of somehow having facilitated the burglary and informed by N Ltd that they would not get a refund of their deposit. The procedural background to this order 2. Today was the second hearing in this matter, scheduled by way of telephone conference. The first hearing, also a telephone co...

4. Waitangi Tribunal - The Whanganui district [pdf, 1.6 MB]

   ...District 13: The Northern South Island, Dr G A Phillipson FOREWORD The research report that follows is one of a series of historical surveys commissioned by the Waitangi Tribunal as part of its Rangahaua Whanui programme. In its present form, it has the status of a working paper: first release. It is published now so that claimants and other interested parties can be aware of its contents and, should they so wish, comment on them and add further information and insights. The pub...

5. HI v D Ltd and FB [2024] NZDT 26 (20 February 2024) [pdf, 233 KB]

   ...September 2023 he was advised that a close family member was seriously ill. He was required to travel at short notice and booked flights to [City 1] and then attempted to book a rental car to drive to [City 2]. 2. He used the online booking platform, FS, which is operated by FB based in [overseas country]. His first booking was not able to be confirmed so he cancelled that booking and made another booking for a rental car with D Ltd. 3. A confirmation of his booking was received. H...

6. NH & UH v SD Ltd [2024] NZDT 666 (4 September 2024) [pdf, 250 KB]

   ...[Lodge] business, and the fact that there was another similar sign on another neighbour’s property, any reasonable person would consider that the Sign belonged to XS Limited. 9. However, having carefully considering the available evidence and information, and having heard from the parties, I find that NH and UH have proved on the balance of probabilities that the Sign belonged to them. I make this finding for the following reasons: (a) It is not disputed by XS Limited that it had i...

7. AS Ltd v ZH Ltd [2014] NZDT 659 (26 September 2014) [pdf, 20 KB]

   ...TRIBUNAL [2014] NZDT 659 BETWEEN AS LIMITED APPLICANT AND ZH LIMITED RESPONDENT Date of Order: 26 September 2014 Referee: Referee Perfect ORDER OF THE DISPUTES TRIBUNAL The Tribunal hereby orders that the claim is dismissed, the contract dated 18 March 2014 stands and the contract dated 30 April 2014 is cancelled as of the date of this order. Facts [1] On 18 March 2014 the manager of AS Limited’s Z store signed a written agreement wit...

8. CC v LL [2021] NZDT 1693 (28 May 2021) [pdf, 87 KB]

   ...puppy due to a change in his personal circumstances. He requested a refund of his deposit. LL responded, “I’ve got a person interested but he has yet to put the deposit in once he does I’ll refund your deposit.” However, LL subsequently informed CC that a few buyers had backed out, so he would not be refunding the deposit. 3. CC now claims a refund of $500.00 together with his $45.00 filing fee. The issue to be determined is whether LL is obliged to refund the deposit. Is LL ob...

9. LCRO 161/2020 SE v GR (31 March 2021) [pdf, 305 KB]

   ...agreement for sale and purchase (the sale agreement) signed three months earlier on 3 March 2014 was subject to a finance condition being satisfied within “5 working days from the date of th[e] [sale] agreement”, and because the residential section formed part of land being subdivided, may also have been subject to a statutory condition.1 [4] At that time Ms SE was represented by another law firm, [Law Firm 2], who on 15 April 2014 forwarded a letter of engagement to Ms SE, and...

10. Form-44-Application-for-contempt-enforcement-proceedings-FINAL-9-December-2024.pdf [pdf, 496 KB]

    When should I use this form? This form lets you apply for a court order against the judgment debtor where they have the means to pay the judgment debt but are refusing to do so. Use this form if all the following apply: • you are the judgment creditor • the money owed in a judgment or court order has not been paid • you can show that the judgment debtor has the means to pay the debt but is refusing to do so. For example, a financial statement or financial assessment has been complet...