Search Results

1. KD & LD v XN Ltd [2024] NZDT 215 (5 March 2024) [pdf, 90 KB]

   ...The Tribunal orders: XN Ltd is to pay KD and LD $1,000.00 within 28 days. XN Ltd did not appear at the hearing. Reasons [1] KD and LD claim the return of a deposit that they paid to XN Ltd relating to the conditional purchase of a car. The applicants claim that the condition of the purchase was not fulfilled, and that they are entitled to a return of the deposit. [2] The applicants said that they inspected a [vehicle] at the premises of XN Ltd on 24 November 2024. The purchase...

2. Unnikrishnan v Goldsmith [2016] NZIACDT 29 (2 June 2016) [pdf, 177 KB]

   ...understand. This ground of complaint alleges Ms Goldsmith did not understand the process and consequently gave poor advice. [1.2] Ms Goldsmith told the complainant he did not need to declare a drink driving conviction, and submitted a work visa application saying he had no convictions. Ms Goldsmith allegedly provided poor advice, and then provided false and misleading information to Immigration New Zealand. [2] Ms Goldsmith’s response to these allegations is that her advice was corre...

3. Smith – Nikora Whānau Trust (2013) 2013 Chief Judge’s MB 302 (2013 CJ 302) [pdf, 109 KB]

   ...dated 6 April 2001 at 162 Napier MB 293-395. [2] The order complained of constituted the Nikora Whānau Trust. This trust was made up of some of the shares of the applicant’s father, Penetaua Hawea, who was deceased at the time the trust was formed, and all the shares of the applicant’s mother who was alive and present in Court and consented to all her shares being included in the trust. [3] The applicant did not consent to the shares she was entitled to from her father bein...

4. ND Ltd v BX & TX [2020] NZDT 1561 (15 July 2020) [pdf, 201 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 5 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2020] NZDT 1561 APPLICANT to claim Respondent to counter claim ND Ltd RESPONDENT to claim Applicant to counter claim BX SECOND RESPONDENT to claim Applicant to counter claim TX The Tribunal hereby orders: 1. BX and TX are jointly and severally liable to pay ND Ltd $2160.87 on or before 30 July 2020. R...

5. TT Ltd v TG Trust [2022] NZDT 136 (17 August 2022) [pdf, 152 KB]

   Page 1 of 7 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2022] NZDT 136 APPLICANT TT Ltd RESPONDENT TG Trust The Tribunal orders: The trustees of the TG Trust are to pay the sum of $1,000.00 to TT Ltd on or before Wednesday, 7 September 2022. REASONS 1. During 2017, NT, on behalf of the Respondent, was converting a residential dwelling at [the Property] to permanent living accommodation for orchard wor...

6. Pompey - Whaanga 1C2B1 (2001) 97 Waikato MB 1 (97 W 1) [pdf, 1.7 MB]

   ...Mabel Pompey under Section 18(1 }(d) of Te Ture Whenua Maori Act 1993 against the Trustees of Whaanga lC2B1 Block claiming damages in respect the termination of the tenancy of a house on the block. ApPEARANCES: Background Miss Nape for the Applicants Verna Tuteao as agent for the Trustees of Whaanga lC2Bl Block The facts giving rise to this application are fairly brief. In 1992 the applicants were invited to stay with their uncle Pomare Riki who had a Licence to Occupy a ho...

7. A Trustees v IAG New Zealand Ltd [2022] CEIT-2019-0078 [pdf, 216 KB]

   1 IN THE CANTERBURY EARTHQUAKES INSURANCE TRIBUNAL CEIT 0078-2019 IN THE MATTER OF CANTERBURY EARTHQUAKES INSURANCE TRIBUNAL ACT 2019 BETWEEN ATL Applicants AND IAG NEW ZEALAND LIMITED First Respondent AND QBE INSURANCE (AUSTRALIA) LIMITED Second Respondent AND ABCL - removed Third Respondent AND FCL Fourth Respondent AND...

8. WH v P Ltd [2023] NZDT 542 (16 October 2023) [pdf, 199 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 5 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2023] NZDT 542 APPLICANT WH RESPONDENT P Ltd The Tribunal orders: 1. P Ltd must pay WH $8,000.00 by 6 November 2023. 2. After the payment referred to in paragraph 1 has been made, WH must make the materials P Ltd originally installed in her kitchen available for a period of 21 days for P Ltd to collect at a time that is reasonably conv...

9. YA & AZ v BT [2024] NZDT 765 (22 November 2024) [pdf, 118 KB]

   ...for the construction of a new fence is dismissed. ii. YA’s and AZ’s claim about BT’s driveway encroaching on their property is struck out. Reasons 1. The parties own neighbouring properties in [City]. YA and AZ (referred to as ‘the applicants’ for simplicity’s sake) initially sought $11,290,00 from BT for: (a) removing a fence adjoining their home on their (the applicants’) property, and for (b) removing a hedge separating the properties (now known to be on t...

10. D Ltd v M Ltd [2023] NZDT 731 (13 December 2023) [pdf, 221 KB]

    CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2023] NZDT 731 APPLICANT D Ltd RESPONDENT M Ltd The Tribunal orders: M Ltd is to pay D Ltd $1,776.06 within 30 calendar days of the date of this order. Reasons: 1. During 2022 and 2023 D Ltd provided cleaning services for M Ltd. M Ltd complained several times to D Ltd about the quality of the cleaning that was being provided. 2. In ea...