Search Results

1. Deliu v New Zealand Law Society [2012] NZHRRT 1 [pdf, 103 KB]

   ...The allegations made against Randerson J [10] In the separate “Bundle of Documents – Randerson J complaint by F Deliu” there is a letter dated 27 May 2010 from Mr Deliu to the Judicial Conduct Commissioner. It opens: I write to lodge a formal complaint against Justice Randerson. The essential grounds of my complaint are that his Honour has: 1. Defamed me to the President of the New Zealand Law Society; 2. Refused to apologize to a fellow court officer as a duty of respect wo...

2. KA v CU Ltd & ZX & GY [2019] NZDT 1501 (18 July 2019) [pdf, 93 KB]

   ...control of the land until 2017, so CU Ltd is not liable for the damage to KA’s drains. The tree owners are liable for her total drain repair costs of $2,547.26. Referee: E Paton-Simpson Date: 18 July 2019 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. If you wish to apply for a rehearin...

3. EU v LX [2019] NZDT 1487 (23 October 2019) [pdf, 194 KB]

   ...District Court [2019] NZDT 1487 APPLICANT EU RESPONDENT LX The Tribunal hereby orders: LX is to pay the sum of $3,703.31 to EU on or before Wednesday 6 November 2019. Reasons: 1. In February 2014, LX and his former partner instructed EU to act on their behalf in relation to sale of a jointly owned property. LX’s share of the final distribution of the net sale proceeds was $6,157.23. On 7 May 2014, EU mistakenly transferred this sum into his bank...

4. LM v HD Ltd [2022] NZDT 148 (4 August 2022) [pdf, 199 KB]

   ...this fee three weeks after the customer’s stay. [Employee 1] submitted that they have a period of up to four weeks to put charges on the customer’s card, but this refers to HD Hotel’s arrangements with the banks, it is not something that they inform their customers about. e. There was no legal basis for HD Hotel to charge an additional $200.00 to LM’s credit card. 11. HD Hotel must pay LM $200.00. The Disputes Tribunal has no power to award costs except in certain limited...

5. ND v BT [2022] NZDT 35 (12 January 2022) [pdf, 93 KB]

   ...that the laptop was of acceptable quality and was fit for purpose, there is no remedy available to the applicant and his claim must be dismissed. Referee: K. Armstrong Date: 12 January 2022 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 r...

6. BC v KC [2023] NZDT 625 (4 December 2023) [pdf, 115 KB]

   ...workshop, then there has not been a failure and BC is not entitled to claim $3,778.11, therefore, the claim is dismissed. Referee: Nigel Wolland Date: 4 December 2023 CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order 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 rehe...

7. LX v O Ltd [2023] NZDT 619 (9 November 2023) [pdf, 112 KB]

   ...do not need to consider the issue of remedy. 26. For these reasons, the claim by LX against O Ltd is dismissed. Referee: K Johnson CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 3 of 4 Date: 09 November 2023 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 rehe...

8. DE v B Ltd [2023] NZDT 643 (6 November 2023) [pdf, 193 KB]

   ...tenable, and plausible. The applicant has had a reasonable opportunity to produce evidence of the vehicle’s servicing. He has not done so. Referee: G.P.Rossiter Date: 6 November 2023 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 fo...

9. UC v Council [2023] NZDT 67 (27 March 2023) [pdf, 131 KB]

   ...He said the Council monitors the growth of its build-outs and disagreed that this one was overgrown. In preparation for this hearing, he visited the site and took some photos which he provided, and considered there was no need for the Council to perform any remedial work to the vegetation. 5. NN agreed that there was some reduced visibility, but only for a small vehicle approaching that corner. The purpose of the build-out was to create some partial obstruction, and they were used all...

10. WT v DE Ltd [2024] NZDT 168 (8 April 2024) [pdf, 96 KB]

    ...repair and alterations business from part of DE Ltd’s shop. WT also ran lessons at the shop. 4. In July 2020 WT drafted a basic written agreement detailing the arrangement. Both parties signed the agreement. 5. In November 2023, DE Ltd informed WT that the agreement was cancelled. 6. WT’s claim seeks compensation (loss of income and other costs/losses) on the grounds that the cancellation was unjustified and unlawful. 7. The hearing took place in [City] on 26 March 20...