12972 items matching your search terms
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 454 APPLICANT SB RESPONDENT UC Ltd The Tribunal orders: UC Ltd is to pay the sum of $18,797.27 to SB on or before 14 September 2023. 1. Reasons: On 20 April 2018, SB signed an agreement to work as an independent contractor for UC Ltd, a real estate agency. She was the selling agent for three townhouses to be...
...provisions of the said Act Respondent BEFORE THE ACCIDENT COMPENSATION APPEAL AUTHORITY R Bedford HEARING on the papers APPEARANCES/COUNSEL Peter Nee Harland for appellant Paul McBride for respondent DECISION: APPLICATION TO REINSTATE APPEAL [1] The application is to reinstate the appeal filed under ACA No. 02/05 (the appeal) that Mr Nee Harland withdrew on the applicant’s behalf on 14 March 2007. [2] The appeal was against a review decisio...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 416 APPLICANT M Ltd RESPONDENT P Ltd The Tribunal orders: P Ltd is to pay to M Ltd the sum of $3,266.85 on or before 21 September 2023. Reasons: 1. In April 2023, M Ltd paid a sum of $18.10 to P Ltd for some juice. 2. On the same date, M Ltd also paid a sum of $2,777.25 to P Ltd in error. That money was sup...
...REPRESENTATION: Mr DA O’Hagan in person Ms V McCall and Ms L Dittrich for defendant DATE OF HEARING: 21, 22 and 23 March 2018 DATE OF DECISION: 5 June 2020 DATE OF COSTS DECISION: 23 July 2020 DECISION OF TRIBUNAL ON COSTS APPLICATION BY PLAINTIFF1 1 [This decision is to be cited as: O’Hagan v Police (Costs) [2020] NZHRRT 28. Note publication restrictions.] IN THE HUMAN RIGHTS REVIEW TRIBUNAL [2020]...
...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 rehearing, you can apply online, download a form from the Disputes Tribunal website or obtain an application form from any Tribunal office. The application must be lodged within 20 working days of the decision having been made. If you are applying outside of the 20 working day timeframe, you must also fill out an Application for Reheari...
0 3 AUG 2022 Section (9) (2) (a) Tena koe - Justice Centre I 19 Aitken Street DX SX10088 I Wellington T 04 918 8800 I F 04 918 8820 ContactUs@j ustice.govt.nz I www.justice.govt.nz Our ref: OIA 97004 Official Information Act 1982 request: Information regarding civil disputes Thank you for your letter of 23 June 2022 to the Ministry of Justice (the Ministry) requesting, under the Official Information Act 1982 (the Act) , information regarding civil disputes in the Disputes Tr...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 294 APPLICANT DT RESPONDENT KI The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons: 1. DT, the applicant, and BI, acting as a representative for her mother, KI, the respondent, both attended the hearing by teleconference. 2. DT claimed $80.00 from the respondent, which included a claim for $35.00 in unpaid lawn...
(Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2021] NZDT 1556 APPLICANT KC RESPONDENT UD The Tribunal orders: 1. KC’s claim that he is not liable to repay a $3,000 deposit to UD is dismissed. 2. KC is to pay $3,000 to UD on or before 30 September 2021. REASONS Brief Details of Claim 3. UD responded to an advertisement on Trade Me and on 16 June 2021 agreed to purchase a caravan from KC for $22,000 that...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 2 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 671 APPLICANT MG & MT RESPONDENT CH The Tribunal orders: CH is to pay the sum of $10,000.00 to MG & MT on or before Monday 16 September 2024. Reasons: 1. On 20 May 2024, the applicants MG and MT contacted CH after seeing an advertisement for sale of CH’s restaurant property. They negotiated a price, and CH said he would ne...
...complaint to the Tribunal. [2] The complaint is that Mr Hammadieh accepted instructions to lodge an expression of interest, and application for residence. The allegations are that he: [2.1] Gave negligent advice, as he told the complainant she could claims skills in an occupational category for which she did not have the qualifications or experience. He then proceeded to lodge an expression of interest with Immigration New Zealand, as the complainant did not qualify, the work he did wa...