Search Results

1. SG v H Ltd [2020] NZDT 1327 (29 October 2020) [pdf, 196 KB]

   ...of the Tribunal. Specifically, the Referee conducted the proceedings (or a Tribunal investigator carried out an enquiry) in a way that was unfair and prejudiced the result of the proceedings. This means you consider there was a breach of natural justice, as a result of procedural unfairness that affected the result of the proceedings. PLEASE NOTE: Parties need to be aware they cannot appeal a Referee’s finding of fact. Where a Referee has made a decision on the issues raised as part...

2. FC Ltd v TN & JM [2021] NZDT 1626 (10 August 2021) [pdf, 188 KB]

   ...of the Tribunal. Specifically, the Referee conducted the proceedings (or a Tribunal investigator carried out an enquiry) in a way that was unfair and prejudiced the result of the proceedings. This means you consider there was a breach of natural justice, as a result of procedural unfairness that affected the result of the proceedings. PLEASE NOTE: Parties need to be aware they cannot appeal a Referee’s finding of fact. Where a Referee has made a decision on the issues raised as part...

3. SA v TD & I Ltd [2021] NZDT 1646 (4 October 2021) [pdf, 139 KB]

   ...of the Tribunal. Specifically, the Referee conducted the proceedings (or a Tribunal investigator carried out an enquiry) in a way that was unfair and prejudiced the result of the proceedings. This means you consider there was a breach of natural justice, as a result of procedural unfairness that affected the result of the proceedings. PLEASE NOTE: Parties need to be aware they cannot appeal a Referee’s finding of fact. Where a Referee has made a decision on the issues raised as part...

4. NX & PX v Airline X [2022] NZDT 181 (28 September 2022) [pdf, 214 KB]

   ...placed on a flight on 25 May 2022 from [City E] to [City D]. They say they were advised that the only options available were to either get themselves to [City E] to make the flight or request a full refund. 6. After further attempts to resolve the matter directly with [Airline X], the applicants booked a flight from [City C] to [City E] the following day. They were then able to arrange with [Airline X] to have them placed on a flight on 23rd May 2022 from [City E] to [City B], via [Ci...

5. SC v CX [2022] NZDT 116 (2 August 2022) [pdf, 204 KB]

   ...Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2022] NZDT 116 APPLICANT SC RESPONDENT CX The Tribunal orders: 1. The claim is dismissed. Reasons 1. This matter was heard by teleconference on 9 March 2022. It was adjourned to give both parties an opportunity to provide me and each other with text messages, photographs and any other evidence or arrange for any witnesses they considered would assist...

6. CP Ltd v ES [2022] NZDT 193 (20 September 2022) [pdf, 225 KB]

   ...of the Tribunal. Specifically, the Referee conducted the proceedings (or a Tribunal investigator carried out an enquiry) in a way that was unfair and prejudiced the result of the proceedings. This means you consider there was a breach of natural justice, as a result of procedural unfairness that affected the result of the proceedings. PLEASE NOTE: Parties need to be aware they cannot appeal a Referee’s finding of fact. Where a Referee has made a decision on the issues raised as part...

7. BT v SM [2021] NZDT 1562 (22 July 2021) [pdf, 217 KB]

   ...of the Tribunal. Specifically, the Referee conducted the proceedings (or a Tribunal investigator carried out an enquiry) in a way that was unfair and prejudiced the result of the proceedings. This means you consider there was a breach of natural justice, as a result of procedural unfairness that affected the result of the proceedings. PLEASE NOTE: Parties need to be aware they cannot appeal a Referee’s finding of fact. Where a Referee has made a decision on the issues raised as part...

8. QC v OC [2023] NZDT 59 (21 February 2023) [pdf, 167 KB]

   ...of the Tribunal. Specifically, the Referee conducted the proceedings (or a Tribunal investigator carried out an enquiry) in a way that was unfair and prejudiced the result of the proceedings. This means you consider there was a breach of natural justice, as a result of procedural unfairness that affected the result of the proceedings. PLEASE NOTE: Parties need to be aware they cannot appeal a Referee’s finding of fact. Where a Referee has made a decision on the issues raised as part...

9. S Ltd v CD & K Ltd [2023] NZDT 788 (5 November 2023) [pdf, 105 KB]

   ...of the Tribunal. Specifically, the Referee conducted the proceedings (or a Tribunal investigator carried out an enquiry) in a way that was unfair and prejudiced the result of the proceedings. This means you consider there was a breach of natural justice, as a result of procedural unfairness that affected the result of the proceedings. PLEASE NOTE: Parties need to be aware they cannot appeal a Referee’s finding of fact. Where a Referee has made a decision on the issues raised as part...

10. TT v Q Ltd [2023] NZDT 460 (29 August 2023) [pdf, 160 KB]

    ...of the Tribunal. Specifically, the Referee conducted the proceedings (or a Tribunal investigator carried out an enquiry) in a way that was unfair and prejudiced the result of the proceedings. This means you consider there was a breach of natural justice, as a result of procedural unfairness that affected the result of the proceedings. PLEASE NOTE: Parties need to be aware they cannot appeal a Referee’s finding of fact. Where a Referee has made a decision on the issues raised as part...