Search Results

1. KI v CT [2023] NZDT 125 (13 June 2023) [pdf, 214 KB]

   ...Tribunal orders: CT is ordered to pay KI the sum of $4,473.50. Payment of this sum is ordered no later than 30 June 2023. Reasons: 1) In January this year the applicant bought a caravan from the respondent. This was via ‘[online selling platform].’ The price paid was $26,902.00. 2) The advertisement placed by the respondent for the caravan included the following: “It is sold as is with the following comments: Upholstery/cabinetry, carpets are in very good condition- looks m...

2. KD v D Ltd [2024] NZDT 315 (16 May 2024) [pdf, 124 KB]

   ...that he had not checked in. He pushed a button to confirm “I didn’t stay at the property” and says a text box appeared in which he wrote that he intended to check in the following day, on the 23 January. He submitted that, and expected that information to be made available to D Ltd. 3. D Ltd says it was not provided any notification by [booking website] about KD’s intention to check in and it is agreed by all that KD did not contact D Ltd directly. D Ltd charged the full amo...

3. BN v LG Ltd [2024] NZDT 611 (10 September 2024) [pdf, 90 KB]

   ...the delays and it does not make up for the fact that BN got no benefit from the $1,499.00 paid. Therefore, I find that a full refund is appropriate. Referee: Sara Grayson Date: 10 September 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...

4. DW v H Ltd [2024] NZDT 618 (6 September 2024) [pdf, 170 KB]

   ...[website] had not given that semi-reassurance, I’m sure DW would have thought to contact [accommodation] directly and this situation could have been avoided. Referee: J Perfect Date: 6 September 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 r...

5. CQ Ltd v CE [2024] NZDT 473 (12 June 2024) [pdf, 129 KB]

   ...photos, invoices and assessor’s report. I find that that the costs of repair are reasonable and consistent with the damage done and ought to be paid by CE. Referee: LK Whineray Date: 12 June 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...

6. TG v N Ltd & EX [2024] NZDT 785 (4 November 2024) [pdf, 92 KB]

   ...standard because the supermarket does not operate under the RMP. So, it can be sold locally. 9. For the reasons above EX must pay TG $30,000.00. Referee: Ms Gayatri Jaduram Date: 4 November 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 fo...

7. Q Ltd v LE [2024] NZDT 827 (14 October 2024) [pdf, 174 KB]

   ...However, I find that LE is liable to pay the first invoice of $208.28, as the tap was fitted properly, and the fault was not related to the Q Ltd work. Referee: Sara Grayson Date: 14 October 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 re...

8. OIA-109631.pdf [pdf, 3.4 MB]

   Justice Centre I 19 Aitken Street DX SX10088 I Wellington T 04 918 8800 I F 04 918 8820 ContactUs@justice.govt.nz I www.justice.govt.nz 8 April 2024 S9(2)(a) S9(2)(a) Ref: OIA 109631 Official Information Act request: Correspondence relating to section 27 reports. Thank you for your email of 9 February 2024, to the Ministry of Justice (the Ministry) requesting, under the Official Information Ac11982 (the Act), documents regarding section 27 reports. Specifically, you requested...

9. MacDonald v MacDonald - Wairau Block XII Section 6C 2C (2021) 69 Te Waipounamu MB 251 (69 TWP 251) [pdf, 256 KB]

   ...exclusion of the other is beyond the existing right of ownership and would require the creation of new rights, which is beyond the jurisdiction of s 18(1)(a). [37] Therefore, I decline to make the order sought under s 18(1)(a) as what is being requested is beyond the jurisdiction of the Court. [38] There is an existing jurisdiction for the Court to allow occupation of land to the exclusion of others in the form of an occupation order under s 328 of the Act. This appears to be more...

10. Muneez v Deng [2013] NZIACDT 33 (27 May 2013) [pdf, 108 KB]

    ...these issues and the need for further documentation. The decline letter observed: “We confirm that we have not received any response from you/your Immigration advisor ...” [18] Even earlier, Immigration New Zealand had sent Ms Deng an email requesting information. This request was dated 15 February 2011 and it too had no response. [19] Mr Muneez’s complaint is that: [19.1] Ms Deng was tardy in informing Mr Muneez that Immigration New Zealand had declined his application. Ms...