12987 items matching your search terms
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2019] NZDT 1357 APPLICANT DE As Trustee of E Family Trust APPLICANT FM As Trustee of E Family Trust APPLICANT XE As Trustee of E Family Trust RESPONDENT SQ RESPONDENT INSURER JBH New Zealand Limited The Tribunal hereby orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons 1. Late in the evening on 24 June 2...
...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...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 2 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 196 APPLICANT SK RESPONDENT T Ltd The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons 1. SK parked on private land while attending a concert in the city, and his vehicle was towed by T Ltd. He paid $350.00 to retrieve his vehicle and claims a refund of that amount plus associated costs, based on his understanding from...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2021] NZDT 1345 APPLICANT K&B Partnership RESPONDENT JC The Tribunal hereby orders: JC is to pay K&B Partnership (the Partnership) $15,000 on or before 5 May 2016. Reasons 1. The Partnership claims $15,000 in compensation from JC for an animal it owned that JC admits he shot. 2. The key issue I have to decid...
...vehicle, and that CB had insufficient time to avoid a collision. I therefore prefer their evidence. I would add that, if CB had not swerved and instead hit MJ head on, she would have likely suffered more serious consequences. Are the costs claimed reasonable? 16. If a party breaches a duty owed to another, and causes damage, they must pay the cost of putting that person into the position they would have been in had the breach not occurred. There is a duty to mitigate loss....
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 73 APPLICANT PQ RESPONDENT ET The Tribunal orders: ET is to pay PQ $18,972.55 by 8 March 2024. Background 1. ET and Mr and Mrs P own neighbouring properties. Mr and Mrs P purchased their property from ET in 2015/16. 2. In or around February 2021 ET and Mr P made a verbal agreement about laying new power cable from the existing [...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 594 APPLICANT 2nd APPLICANT 3RD APPLICANT EU F Ltd SC Ltd RESPONDENT I Ltd The Tribunal orders: I Ltd Limited is to pay $19,811.51 to F Ltd on or before 16 August 2024; and I Ltd Limited is to pay $5486.14 to SC Ltd on or before 16 August 2024; and EU has no further liability to F Ltd or SC Ltd in relation t...
...events at the Bank at about the same time resulted in Mr Lewis raising a personal grievance alleging that he had been disadvantaged unjustifiably in his employment. [6] On 4 March 2010 the parties entered into an agreement which the plaintiff claims was a variation to his employment agreement but which the defendant categorises as an agreement settling his grievance including the terms on which he would leave his employment. The terms of this agreement, which took effect with the...
...NEW ZEALAND MEAT WORKERS & RELATED TRADES UNION INC v AFFCO NEW ZEALAND LIMITED NZEmpC AUCKLAND [2015] NZEmpC 165 [23 September 2015] IN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT AUCKLAND [2015] NZEmpC 165 EMPC 152/2015 IN THE MATTER OF an application for injunction AND IN THE MATTER an application for leave to amend pleadings BETWEEN NEW ZEALAND MEAT WORKERS & RELATED TRADES UNION INC First Plaintiff AND ROBERTA KEREWAI RATU AND ORS Sec...
...LIMITED Plaintiff AND SAMARA ANN MEADS Defendant Hearing: (on the papers) Judgment: 27 September 2013 JUDGMENT OF JUDGE A D FORD [1] On 25 June 2013, the plaintiff filed a statement of claim in this Court challenging by way of de novo hearing the whole of a determination of the Employment Relations Authority (the Authority) dated 28 May 2013. 1 The determination had found that the plaintiff was Ms Meads’ employer a...