Search Results

1. EN v IX Ltd [2022] NZDT 223 (30 November 2022) [pdf, 94 KB]

   ...of the doors. EN’s claim is therefore dismissed and IX Ltd are entitled to the balance due for the manufacture and supply of the doors and windows. Referee: R Merrett Date: 30 November 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 reh...

2. NW & NG v TM Ltd [2023] NZDT 579 (16 November 2023) [pdf, 115 KB]

   ...[2023] NZDT 579 APPLICANT NW and NG RESPONDENT TM Ltd The Tribunal orders: TM Ltd is to pay $7500.00 to NW and NG on or before 14 December 2023. Reasons 1. NW and NG contracted TM Ltd to provide concreting services in the form of a new concrete driveway covering 123sqm. A price of $21,975.00 was agreed and this included replacement of a section of the shared driveway. The contract price was paid in full by completion of the job. 2. The job took 20 days rathe...

3. HL Ltd v AH [2023] NZDT 490 (17 October 2023) [pdf, 178 KB]

   ...occurred on the facts of this case. As HL Ltd has not shown that the damage was caused by AH’s act of negligence, its claim is dismissed. Referee: Ms Cowie DTR Date: 17 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...

4. DE v SC [2023] NZDT 499 (10 October 2023) [pdf, 205 KB]

   ...for the accident, and for the damage to both DE’s vehicle and to SC’s vehicle is the driver of [car 2]. 16. The claim against SC is dismissed. Referee: Nicholas Blake Date: 10 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 reh...

5. XS v UQ [2024] NZDT 132 (19 March 2024) [pdf, 184 KB]

   ...7. The amount claimed is the final price for the work less an adjustment for depreciation of the wall. 8. The claim is proved. Referee: B M Smallbone Date: Tuesday, 19 March 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 rehe...

6. MM v N Ltd [2024] NZDT 503 (8 August 2024) [pdf, 173 KB]

   ...take into account that this was a second-hand vehicle. My view might be different if it was new. 9) In these circumstances the claim must be dismissed. Referee: GP Rossiter Date: 8 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...

7. Practice directions

   PRACTICE NOTE: As Directed by the Adjudicator under clause 1 of Schedule 1 of the Motor Vehicle Sales Act 2003 On this page: Information that needs to be included with your application Adjournments Remote viewing of hearings Practice direction: Information that needs to be included with your application This practice direction sets out the policy and procedures of the Motor Vehicle Disputes Tribunal (MVDT) about the information that needs to be included with your application. You must provide

   Located in:

   1. Tribunals >
   2. Motor Vehicle Disputes Tribunal

8. LCRO 162/2018 BQ v XR (29 September 2020) [pdf, 267 KB]

   ...his position was better protected and put him less at risk of the terms of the separation being vulnerable to later challenge. [78] I think it reasonable for Mr BQ to have adopted that view. His approach presents as conventional. Mr BQ had formed a view that terms of the earlier s 21 agreement were favourable to Mr XR, and that he thought it prudent to ensure that the terms of a final settlement were properly recorded in a s 21A agreement. His decision to take steps to formalis...

9. T v Mudaliar [2015] NZIACDT 79 (06 August 2015) [pdf, 241 KB]

   ...referral under s 48 of the Immigration Advisers Licensing Act 2007 BY The Registrar of Immigration Advisers Registrar BETWEEN E B T Complainant AND Viveg Lingam Mudaliar Adviser THE NAME AND ANY INFORMATION IDENTIFYING THE COMPLAINANT IS NOT TO BE PUBLISHED DECISION REPRESENTATION: Registrar: Ms S Blick, lawyer, MBIE, Auckland. Complainant: In person Adviser: Mr N King, Lawyer, Auckland. Date Issued:...

10. [2018] NZEmpC 37 Edminstin v Sanford Ltd [pdf, 396 KB]

    ...applicant P Wicks QC and K Dunn, counsel for the defendant Judgment: 2 May 2018 JUDGMENT OF JUDGE K G SMITH - COSTS [1] On 6 June 2017, former Chief Judge Colgan delivered a judgment in proceedings by John Edminstin in which he claimed a compliance order against Sanford Limited. The case involved navigational records known as marks.1 Issues about ownership and use of the marks materialised from a dispute over interpreting a settlement agreement between Mr E...