Search Results

1. YT v ED Ltd [2016] NZDT 1444 (18 August 2016) [pdf, 185 KB]

   ...$9,342.50 paid to ED. ED counterclaims that it is not liable to refund the deposit, but rather that Mr T owes ED a further $9,342.50 for the second preliminary deposit. Since the total sum in dispute is $18,685.00, the parties have signed the required form agreeing to extend the financial limit of the Tribunal’s jurisdiction to $20,000.00. 6. The issues to be determined are: a) Was approval given for the loan? If conditional, were all conditions met? CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 2 o...

2. DTD v TS [2021] NZDT 1371 (6 April 2021) [pdf, 186 KB]

   ...ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2021] NZDT 1371 APPLICANT DTD Ltd RESPONDENT TS The Tribunal orders: The claim by DTD Ltd is dismissed. Reasons [1] NT is an employment advocate trading as DTD Ltd. She was formerly employed by DT NZ Ltd. DT Ltd is a franchise of DT NZ Ltd. On the 20 July 2020 TS signed an authorisation for DTD Ltd to act as her employment consultant in relation to a dispute with her former employer. There was no written contract...

3. ND v LB Ltd [2023] NZDT 458 (15 August 2023) [pdf, 188 KB]

   ...This is for the following reasons: a. I understand that ND has paid around $3,200.00 in total to LB Ltd. b. I find that LB Ltd is entitled to retain $1,000.00 being a pragmatic assessment of the price for the part of the services that it performed competently, being the measurement and the majority of the installation of the shade cloth. c. I advised the parties during the hearing that I am unable to award ND more than the amount claimed by him on his application form. This i...

4. UC v OI and others [2023] NZDT 759 (20 November 2023) [pdf, 153 KB]

   ...premises for her hair salon business. At some point the Trust decided to replace the roof rather than to continue trying to repair it. 3. On 31 October 2022, UC contacted Trustee OI and advised the roof had leaked over the weekend. UC requested information about the roofing work as she had installed ceiling panels and lighting was about to be installed. UC also advised she was planning to lay laminate flooring the next weekend. 4. On 3 November 2022, OI advised UC that the roof work...

5. [2006] NZEmpC Thamer v Massey University [pdf, 22 KB]

   ...to his disadvantage. [8] To the extent that he needs to prove that work he had once been doing has been contracted to others, I hold that disclosure of contracts in categories 1, 2, and 4 is relevant. [9] However, I find that the information requested in categories 3, 5, and 6 are not relevant to his claim. The plaintiff submitted that he needed detailed information about costs and expenses sought in order to make sure his evidence was correct in all details. However, I do not...

6. [2006] NZEmpC WC 25/06 Pars Transport Ltd v Lardelli [pdf, 23 KB]

   ...the plaintiff should have had in its possession as required by law. This entailed more time and expense to the defendant and counsel who had made preparations to attend the hearing on 31 October. [8] At this late stage the plaintiff also requested the production of cellular and telephone records which entailed further preparation and expense to the defendant. Mr Gowland submits that, if this information had been so important to the plaintiff, it had had 7 months to make thi...

7. Eppanapally v Zhou [2014] NZIACDT 118 (28 November 2014) [pdf, 229 KB]

   ...working in the practice. She was the sole licence holder in the practice at that time. She wrote a submission in response to a query from Immigration New Zealand. However, Immigration New Zealand was not satisfied with the response, requested more information and provided a deadline for the reply. Ms Zhou rang Mr Eppanapally’s agent (though he disputes the person was authorised) and requested the particulars. [3] Further than that, Ms Zhou did not follow up, and Immigration New Zealand...

8. Tomov v Auckland Council [2012] NZWHT Auckland 48 [pdf, 101 KB]

   ...claimants needed to be involved. In any event, the claimants needed to prove their claims against the other respondents. (f) The claimants have not established that costs and expenses were unnecessarily incurred by them. The Council’s case forms only part of the time allocated by the Tribunal for the hearing of the adjudication. At least a day was required by the Tribunal to hear from the other respondents (not the Council) and deal with proving the claimants’ claim...

9. Warrington - Hopa Te Piki (2011) 2011 Chief Judge's MB 325 (2011 CJ 325) [pdf, 162 KB]

   ...and that they be provided with the opportunity to respond within 28 days. [10] A copy of the report was issued to the parties on 11 December 2007. Following that, in late December 2007, the case manager received a telephone call from Mrs Rore requesting further time to reply to the report. Despite that request nothing further was heard from Mrs Rore and so the file was returned to the Deputy Chief Judge on 10 March 2008. Then on 1 April 2008 the Deputy Chief Judge issued directio...

10. PQ v Hakaoro [2013] NZIACDT 48 (8 August 2013) [pdf, 144 KB]

    ...Hakaoro attempted to sexually exploit the complainant [73] I accept the complainant’s account that Mr Hakaoro attempted to secure sexual availability in exchange for immigration services. [74] Mr Hakaoro denied he behaved in this way, and his wife claimed he did not have any opportunity. She said the complainant never travelled in the car alone with Mr Hakaoro, where the conduct was alleged to have occurred. [75] Through his counsel Mr Hakaoro challenged the complainant’s evidence....