12996 items matching your search terms
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2021] NZDT 1696 APPLICANT LX RESPONDENT GQ Ltd The Tribunal orders: 1. The Respondent shall pay The Applicant $1,715.00 by 17 June 2021. 2. The Respondent shall collect the washing machine from The Applicant’s premises by 24 June 2021 or pay The Applicant an additional $250.00 by that date to dispose of it. Reasons: 1....
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 583 APPLICANT GM RESPONDENT D Ltd The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons 1. GM purchased a [dress] from D Ltd in October 2023. She wore the dress for a very short time and noticed a significant tear along a seam. She informed D Ltd and the dress was replaced along with a $100 voucher. 2. The replacement dress arr...
...failed to apply in time, and withdrew an application for visitor visas dishonestly; telling Immigration New Zealand that he had instructions to do so. [1.4] He dishonestly told the Authority when responding to the complaint that he had lodged the request for reconsideration in time, and had instructions to withdraw the visitor visa applications. The Registrar’s statement of complaint alleges neither claim was true. [1.5] Mr Fu took lodgement fees for the reconsideration and later reque...
...v Corrections [2024] NZHRRT 24. Note publication restrictions. IN THE HUMAN RIGHTS REVIEW TRIBUNAL [2024] NZHRRT 24 I TE TARAIPIUNARA MANA TANGATA REDACTED DECISION OF TRIBUNAL1 2 [2] In February 2022, XKL made an information privacy request under the Privacy Act 2020 (the Act) to Corrections for CCTV and on-body camera (OBC) footage of an incident during a search of XKL by a Corrections officer. [3] Corrections refused XKL’s request. XKL subsequently filed a claim th...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 749 APPLICANT XX RESPONDENT ND The Tribunal orders: ND is to pay XX $850.00 on or before Wednesday 11 December 2024. Reasons: 1. This claim involves ownership and payment claims about a [Car]. XX owned the Car and initially agreed to allow her daughter TX to use it, on the basis TX could own the Car if she paid $2,500.00 to XX in regul...
...THE MĀORI LAND COURT OF NEW ZEALAND TAITOKERAU DISTRICT A20140007967 CJ 2014/8 UNDER Section 45, Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993 IN THE MATTER OF Neville David Nathan Whānau Trust BETWEEN AND BETTY YATES Applicant NEVILLE DAVID NATHAN Respondent Hearing: 6 November 2015 at 2015 Chief Judge's MB 814-844 (Heard at Whangārei) Judgment: 20 April 2016 RESERVED JUDGMENT OF DEPUTY CHIEF JUDGE C L FOX...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 5 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 303 APPLICANT IZ RESPONDENT JZ SECOND RESPONDENT LZ The Tribunal orders: JZ is to pay IZ the amount of $30,000.00 by 16 April 2024. The claim against LZ is struck out. Reasons Background to dispute 1. The parties in this matter are JZ, IZ and LZ. IZ and JZ are siblings. LZ is the wife (or former wife) of JZ....
...This is an appeal against a decision of the Corporation of 14 June 2019 suspending the appellant’s weekly compensation payments. Background [2] The appellant suffered a back injury on 16 April 2014 for which he has cover. There is a separate claim for mental injury. In relation to this injury, following the grant of cover, rehabilitation actions have included psychology services and a quarterly psychiatric review. In respect of the latter mental injury claim, the Corporation...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 381 APPLICANT BC RESPONDENT ST Ltd The Tribunal orders: ST Ltd is to pay $4472.08 to BC on or before 30 May 2024. Reasons 1. BC engaged ST Ltd to work on her bathroom renovation. The parties agreed $3000 would be paid for the plumbing work, $1400 for gibbing and $1400 for waterproofing. Handwritten receipts were signed for p...
...being referred to the Authority. [4] While the proceedings between GEA and Mr Schicker were progressing in the Authority, an issue arose as to disclosure of documents. This issue initially appeared to be resolved by the Authority treating the request for disclosure as a request for disclosure of documents from non-parties, namely the plaintiffs in the present proceedings, the Clarkes. The process which the Authority adopted to deal with the disclosure request against the non-par...