Search Results

1. IS v TM [2023] NZDT 270 (25 May 2023) [pdf, 186 KB]

   ...amount of rubbish from the property at her own expense, and had done a significant amount of cleaning, leaving the place tidier than when she moved in. She also argued that she had no obligation to cover the cost of another room, that had belonged to a former flatmate. CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 2 of 4 7. I accept that there was no agreement or obligation for IS to contribute to another room that she was not renting. While she did have an obligation to contribute to the clean up p...

2. NC & DC v T Ltd & HG [2023] NZDT 222 (19 May 2023) [pdf, 198 KB]

   ...NC and DC $3100.25 on or before 5pm on 19 June 2023. 2. HG is struck off this claim. Reasons 1. The first hearing was adjourned. After that hearing, T Ltd and HG contacted the Tribunal and requested that I make a decision based on the information provided in the first hearing and the file. NC and DC agreed to that request. 2. Both parties told me they understood and accepted I would not take into consideration any further evidence or information and there will not be anothe...

3. X Ltd v DN [2023] NZDT 282 (24 July 2023) [pdf, 180 KB]

   ...the Tribunal on 23 December 2022, the claim for the repair was made within the six year limitation period. DN is required to pay this amount, which is $1,955.00. Referee: M Wilson Date: 24 July 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 rehe...

4. SH v BU [2024] NZDT 552 (24 July 2024) [pdf, 92 KB]

   ...full but was not sent the phone. See section 35 Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017. 10. Therefore, BU is to pay SH $1,748.34 by Wednesday 13 August 2024. Referee: C Price Date: 24 July 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...

5. TT v HQ and KG [2020] NZDT 1700 (11 March 2020) [pdf, 220 KB]

   ...claimed do not fall within the category of costs which the Tribunal has jurisdiction to award. For that reason, I dismiss the counterclaim brought by the Trust. Referee: P Ferguson Date: 11 March 2020 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...

6. BB v KU [2023] NZDT 408 (26 July 2023) [pdf, 186 KB]

   ...when the table had a TV on it; and a valuation of the table and 6 chairs dated 5 April 2023, which is after the tabletop was refinished. 8. BB has not re-submitted her prior valuation evidence that she had inexplicably redacted the relevant information from. 9. BB claims she obtained 2 remedial quotes but has not submitted either. It is unclear as to when the quotes were obtained as the table was delivered Sunday the 26 February and collected by the furniture maker for refinishing...

7. QE & TE v G Ltd [2024] NZDT 878 (29 August 2024) [pdf, 200 KB]

   ...that principle only applies between the exact same parties. As G Ltd was not a party to the District Court proceedings this rule does not prevent QE and TE from bringing this claim before the Tribunal. 8. QE and TE say that section 17 of the Law Reform Act 1936 means they are entitled to claim against G Ltd as the section allows a person to bring a claim against a second joint tortfeasor even if the person has secured judgment against the first joint tortfeasor (section 17(1)). Section...

8. Greer v Corrections (Costs) [2022] NZHRRT 44 [pdf, 455 KB]

   ...steps to prosecute the claim resulted in significant time being wasted by the defendant and the Tribunal. [5.4] By contrast the defendant engaged constructively with the case, spending significant resources to recreate a response to a Privacy Act request from 20 October 2014 to provide Mr Greer with a factual foundation to ventilate his concerns. DISCUSSION [6] Following the Tribunal decision in Andrews v Commissioner of Police (Costs) [2014] NZHRRT 31 which was upheld by the High...

9. DT v X Ltd [2023] NZDT 330 (31 July 2023) [pdf, 129 KB]

   ...so the claim must be dismissed. Referee: L Trevelyan Date: 31 July 2023 1 GPE Holdings Ltd v Tile ‘N’ Style [2014] NZHC 802. 2 Minister of Education v Carter Holt Harvey Ltd [2014]NZHC 681. 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...

10. SO v C Ltd [2024] NZDT 450 (20 May 2024) [pdf, 174 KB]

    ...full refund under CGA s 23 without any deduction for the period of use. The payments made totalled $2,100.00, so this sum must be refunded by the supplier. Referee: E Paton-Simpson Date: 20 May 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...