Search Results

1. Roborgh v Lay [pdf, 303 KB]

   ...hearing I was told that neither Mr Townsend nor Counsel had been aware of the company’s removal, and steps were being taken to have the company reinstated on the Register. Therefore, I am proceeding on the assumption that JTL is still a legally formed and registered company 3.8 The ninth respondent is Mr Peter Townsend, who is a director of JTL. The Owners claim that Mr Townsend has a personal liability for the claims that they have made against JTL. I will need to determine...

2. Disputes-Tribunal-Amendment-Bill_FINAL.pdf [pdf, 1.5 MB]

   ...Amendment Bill Approval for Introduction Date of issue: 10 February 2025 The following document have been proactively released in accordance with Cabinet Office Circular CO (23) 04. Some information has been withheld on the basis that it would not, if requested under the Official Information Act 1982 (OIA), be re leased. Where that is the case, the relevant section of the OIA has been noted and no public interest has been identified that would outweigh the reasons for withhold ing it....

3. Pinnock & Ors as Trustees of the Pinnock Trust v Auckland City Council [2011] NZWHT Auckland 28 [pdf, 373 KB]

   IN THE WEATHERTIGHT HOMES TRIBUNAL TRI-2010-100-000044 [2011] NZWHT AUCKLAND 28 BETWEEN RALPH ERNEST KENNEDY PINNOCK, ADRIANA LUCY PINNOCK AND PETER BRUCE JACOBSON as Trustees of the PINNOCK TRUST Claimant AND AUCKLAND CITY COUNCIL First Respondent AND DAVID WOOD Second Respondent AND ROWAN NIGEL COLE Third Respondent AND ROY RAWSON Fourth Respondent AND NISHAR MOHAMMED Fifth Respondent AND EASTRIDGE CONSTRUCTION LIMITED (Removed) Sixth Respond

4. JM v DTM [2011] NZIACDT 1 (19 January 2011) [pdf, 119 KB]

   ...also for the purposes of this decision. [14] I have considered the response in full. [15] Key aspects of the response to the minute presented by SN were that SN is said to have been a “Non-Advising Principal”. Further: [15.1] SNJ had not requested payment of $4,837.50, only $2,868.75. The calculation of $4,837.50 was for the purposes of illustration only. The fee was reasonable, including on a comparative basis. [15.2] The Complainant falsely stated that the work was pro bono,...

5. O'Hagan v Police (Costs) [2020] NZHRRT 28 [pdf, 614 KB]

   ...these proceedings Mr O’Hagan alleged the Police did not respond to his IPP 6 request within the 20 working day timeframe allowed by the Privacy Act 1993 (PA), s 40. The Police have always admitted this breach and made apology when providing the requested information 18 days outside the 20 working day limit. In the decision delivered by the Tribunal as O’Hagan v Police [2020] NZHRRT 22 at [45] the Tribunal held that this apology was genuine. [2] Mr O’Hagan sought the maximum sum o...

6. BU v SI Ltd [2015] NZDT 1460 (10 September 2015) [pdf, 183 KB]

   ...in this claim were innocent victims, and I note that the Land Rover only had third party insurance, so SI Ltd has had to bear the loss of its own vehicle. Referee: E Paton-Simpson Date: 10 September 2015 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 or a mistake was made. If you wish to apply...

7. NP v KM 2 [2023] NZDT 340 (20 June 2023) [pdf, 194 KB]

   ...saddle (as set out in paragraph 19 below). Background 1. The adjournment order dated 8 March 2023 sets out the background to the dispute. 2. Pursuant to that order, NP returned the saddle to KM, and KM had it assessed by BN. 3. KM informed the Tribunal that, on the basis of BN’s findings, she did not agree to refund the purchase price to NP. A second hearing took place by phone on 2 June 2023. Findings 4. It is not disputed that KM’s Facebook Marketplace listi...

8. NM v U Ltd [2023] NZDT 512 (25 October 2023) [pdf, 177 KB]

   ...breaches of the FTA or the CGA, or for that matter the terms and conditions of the contract between NM and the company, the claim is therefore dismissed. Referee: M Wilson Date: 25 October 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 for a rehe...

9. NN v SG Ltd [2024] NZDT 111 (13 February 2024) [pdf, 199 KB]

   ...Ltd is to pay NN $4,643.99 on or before 6 March 2024. 2. The remainder of the claim is dismissed. Reasons Introduction 1. In early October 2023, NN’s [ute] (‘the ute’) was taken to SG Ltd with a suspected blown head cylinder. NN was informed the repair would cost approximately $1,500.00 for the head cylinder plus two days labour. The total quote for the job was in or around $3,000.00. Repairs were carried out and when NN went to collect the ute, he was charged $8,668.99 for th...

10. [2007] NZEmpC WC 32A/07 Port of Napier Ltd v Maritime Union of NZ Inc [pdf, 76 KB]

    ...responses, PONL launched these proceedings fearing that a picket would be mounted on Monday 10 December or thereabouts. [12] When counsel met with me by telephone conference call to deal with the litigation and an early hearing of the plaintiff’s claims, MUNZ undertook that no such action would be taken by it pending the decision of the Court. Claim against RMTU and individual employees and interim relief sought [13] The statement of claim against the defendants in this proceedi...