Search Results

1. EM v EI Ltd [2024] NZDT 366 (26 June 2024) [pdf, 175 KB]

   ...various reasons, EM was unable to complete the course. He claims a refund from EI Ltd of the price that he paid. [2] The documents provided showed that EM signed a document described as “Disclosure to all Recreational Students and Booking Information” on 20 November 2022. On the same date, he completed and signed a questionnaire relating to his medical fitness. He paid $499.00 for the course fee, and was scheduled to do the course at [lake] on the weekend of 17 – 18 December 2022...

2. DF v QT [2024] NZDT 474 (11 June 2024) [pdf, 101 KB]

   ...instructed her to obtain a quote to replace the fence. DF obtained a quote from Mr U, a local builder / handyman. The quote was for $7,570.00 to replace the boundary fence between [address 1] and [address 2]. 4. Both parties submitted this information to their insurers. The claims were accepted, and they received payment of $3,785.00 each. 5. Mr U then refused to proceed with the job. In DF’s view, he did so because he realised that he had under-quoted the job. DF suspects t...

3. [2016] NZEmpC 71 Marx v Southern Cross Campus Board of Trustees [pdf, 126 KB]

   ...my professional duties is yet another attempt to bully and discredit me. As mentioned in my earlier email this morning I have every intention of defending myself as I consider your actions extremely prejudicial. [22] The email concluded with a request for “forms I need to make a formal complain[t] on how I have been treated”. [23] A further email followed on 8 February 2013 in which Mrs Marx stated that: We consider the current ‘suspension of my duties’ by the pri...

4. [2022] NZEmpC 36 Kang v Saena Company Ltd [pdf, 231 KB]

   ...freezing orders and ancillary orders against it. Mr Hwang and Ms Weon are shareholders in Saena. Freezing orders and ancillary orders are sought against them because they may control the business and/or have received any proceeds of sale. Request for urgency [7] The application was filed on 1 March 2022. Urgency was granted and the application was considered at a hearing with counsel, Mr Seungmin Kang, on 3 March 2022. 1 Kang v Saena Company Ltd [2021] NZERA 196 (Me...

5. TS v CT Ltd [2019] NZDT 1377 (25 July 2019) [pdf, 236 KB]

   ...a result of condensation. 17. All disconnection and removal costs are addressed via the order to have CTL undertake all that work at its own cost. Referee: J Perfect Date: 25 July 2019 CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order 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 or a mistake was made. If you wish to apply...

6. OO v QP [2023] NZDT 70 (20 February 2023) [pdf, 226 KB]

   ...what his intended purpose for the house would be. He told QD that he wanted to rent it out, either as long-term rental or for visitor accommodation, such as Air BnB. QD told him he should have no issues with Air BnB. 7. OO points out that the information pack provided by M Ltd contained a rental and market appraisal, which also suggested to him that it could be used for rental accommodation. The advertising brochure also referred to it as having four bedrooms and three bathrooms and re...

7. YI v CU Ltd [2023] NZDT 545 (25 October 2023) [pdf, 189 KB]

   ...invoices, and $500.00 compensation for time YI spent sorting out the issues with [water company], rescheduling of her flight [overseas] and overdraft interest. 7. The issues to be determined are: • Did CU breach the contract by failing to perform its contractual obligations to a reasonable standard? • If so, what reasonably foreseeable losses resulted from the breach? Did CU breach the contract by failing to perform its contractual obligations to a reasonable standard?...

8. TI & NI v HJ Ltd [2024] NZDT 487 (4 June 2024) [pdf, 280 KB]

   ...claim that has been made against it. The last hearing was adjourned to allow HJ Ltd to provide full details of the amount that it wishes to have considered as a set-off to the claim that has been made against it, however HJ Ltd has not provided any information regarding this to the Tribunal. 3. HJ Ltd did not attend the hearing today. The absence of a party does not prevent the hearing going ahead. 4. The issues to be resolved are: a. Did HJ Ltd provide its services with re...

9. UC & SM v BC [2024] NZDT 445 (9 May 2024) [pdf, 207 KB]

   ...details before 2 June 2024 BC is not required to pay the $216.00 to UC and SM. Referee: L Thompson Date: 9 May 2024 CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order 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...

10. Peng v Tan [2016] NZIACDT 63 (29 September 2016) [pdf, 146 KB]

    ...with Immigration New Zealand regarding Mr Peng’s parents, but they did not meet with her. She was a licensed immigration adviser. [5] On 9 August 2011, Mr Tan received his licence as an immigration adviser. On 12 August, Ms Aasa submitted visa requests to Immigration New Zealand for Mr Peng’s parents. On 6 September 2012, Immigration New Zealand refused the requests. [6] The following year, 2012, Mr Peng called Mr Tan’s office, and Mr Feng told him Immigration New Zealand refu...