Search Results

1. [2023] NZEmpC 20 Henry v South Waikato Achievement Trust [pdf, 385 KB]

   ...[2011] NZEmpC 160, [2011] ERNZ 466 at [26]. 6 Section 103A(5). 7 A Ltd v H, above n 5; and Angus v Ports of Auckland Ltd (No 2), above n 5. [14] The Trust requested that an order be made that there be no publication of the names or information identifying the person in care, her support worker, or the employee alleged to have committed the assault. The person in care is now deceased. None of those persons gave evidence at the hearing. [15] I agree that it would not be...

2. [2024] NZEnvC 266 McCallum Bros Limited v Auckland Council [pdf, 373 KB]

   ...proved to be particularly complex. The constitution of the Court [10] The Court was co-chaired by Judge AHC Warren of the Māori Land Court who also holds an alternate Environment Court warrant, and Judge JA Smith of the Environment Court. They formed a court together with Commissioners S Myers and 5 McCallum Bros Limited v Auckland Council [2023] NZEnvC 130. 6 McCallum Bros Limited v Auckland Council [2024] NZEnvC 75. 7 McCallum Bros Limited v Auckland Council [2024] NZEnvC 72.

3. ABR v ZYN and ZYM [2013] NZDT 35 (20 May 2013) [pdf, 91 KB]

   ...Ltd SECOND RESPONDENT Date of Order: 20 May 2013 Referee: Referee Edison ORDER OF THE DISPUTES TRIBUNAL The Tribunal hereby orders that ZYN Ltd shall pay ABR Ltd the sum of $5,442.56 by 4pm on 3 June 2013. The claim against ZYM Ltd is dismissed. Facts [1] LG owns and runs a dairy in [a place] with his wife. The business is operated through their company, ABR Ltd. On Wednesday 12 December 2012, the business premises were forcibly broken in...

4. King & Bailey [2011] NZWHT Auckland 2 [pdf, 92 KB]

   ...notice of the decision. On receiving such an application I must decide whether or not the claim meets the eligibility criteria. [4] I have considered the following documents in conducting my review: The application for review and attached information. The assessor’s report dated 27 October 2010. The eligibility check list from the Department of Building and Housing The claimants’ submissions to the Chief Executive dated 18 August 2010 The letter from Laura Tait o...

5. [2012] NZEmpC 130 CPC (New Zealand) Ltd v Dunlop [pdf, 77 KB]

   ...they were not breaching the terms of our employment agreement and our arrangements for a friendly exit. ... Therefore all the time and cost incurred for John [Tannahill] is a direct result of the other party’s failure to provide information as requested, and of course a function of their attempt to succeed with a substantial alternative claim. [7] Mr Parbhu also made a number of other allegations against Mr Dunlop and his counsel, Mr Tannahill, and he attached to his submission...

6. ML v KD [2023] NZDT 757 (13 December 2023) [pdf, 190 KB]

   ...encountered difficulties starting the Car; with battery reliability; and with dashboard warning lights appearing. I accept ML’s evidence she obtained an initial diagnostic check some 5 days after purchase, which indicated a range of faults. This information was passed onto KD, however after some initial assistance, KD stopped responding to messages. ML sought legal advice and obtained a more detailed diagnostic report from DI. This noted cylinders misfiring and the need for alternato...

7. CL & HD v T Ltd & S Ltd [2023] NZDT 72 (14 February 2023) [pdf, 223 KB]

   ...report. I find that the cost of this report is a consequential loss claimable under the CGA in this case. Therefore, S Ltd must pay CL and HD, $20,348.30. Referee: Ms Gayatri Jaduram Date: 14 February 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...

8. SX v Q Ltd & TX [2024] NZDT 112 (9 February 2024) [pdf, 196 KB]

   ...management company but Q Ltd repeatedly failed/refused to do so. 14. The day before the first hearing on 5 October 2023, Q Ltd made a substantial written submission, which included multiple inspection reports that SX had never seen before, in a format inconsistent with previous reports. 15. SX files this claim seeking $25,524.32 for a partial refund of management fees and damages for multiple breaches of contract. 16. TX was joined as a second Respondent after the first hearing d...

9. NQ v TN & P Ltd [2023] NZDT 278 (1 August 2023) [pdf, 233 KB]

   ...of the agreement; and how the consumer may cancel the agreement. 9. [NQ and husband] were not provided with a quote. An invoice was sent to them after works commenced, after the first payment had been made. The invoice did not contain any information about their rights to cancel the contract at any time, nor were they advised orally of their rights. 10. NN, director of P Ltd, and TN, salesperson, attended the first hearing on 28 April 2023. They stated [NQ and husband] were advi...

10. BL & DL v L Ltd & V Ltd [2023] NZDT 304 (9 August 2023) [pdf, 191 KB]

    ...defect so that it is not of acceptable quality and accordingly they are not entitled to return the umbrella and be refunded the purchase price. Referee: K Cowie DTR Date: 9 August 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...