12987 items matching your search terms
IN THE DISTRICT COURT AT WELLINGTON I TE KŌTI-Ā-ROHE KI TE WHANGANUI-A-TARA [2021] NZACC 123 ACA 08/18 UNDER THE ACCIDENT COMPENSATION ACT 2001 IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION TO RECALL DECISION BETWEEN CRAIG RICHARD JONES Applicant AND ACCIDENT COMPENSATION CORPORATION Respondent Hearing: On the Papers Appearances: Applicant in person D Tuiqereqere for the respondent Judgment: 5 August 2021 ______________________________...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 11 APPLICANT LN RESPONDENT IQ Ltd The Tribunal orders: 1. IQ Ltd is to pay $549.98 to LN on or before 4pm 15 March 2024. Reasons: 2. On 14 November 2022 LN contracted IQ Ltd to provide property management services over her rental house (‘house’). In March 2023 new tenants moved in and then gave notice to vacate on 21 June...
KAMLESH PRASAD v LSG SKY CHEFS NEW ZEALAND LTD NZEmpC AUCKLAND [2017] NZEmpC [11 May 2017] IN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT AUCKLAND [2017] NZEmpC 48 EMPC 253/2015 IN THE MATTER OF an application for a declaration under s 6(5) of the Employment Relations Act 2000 AND IN THE MATTER of an application for an order requiring further and better particulars of claims BETWEEN KAMLESH PRASAD First Plaintiff AND LIUTOFAGA TULAI Second Pl...
IN THE DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2015] NZDT 1049 BETWEEN FB APPLICANT AND TY RESPONDENT AND TYY RESPONDENT’S INSURER Date of Order: 10/12/2015 Referee: Referee: Paton Simpson ORDER OF THE DISPUTES TRIBUNAL The Tribunal hereby orders that the claim is dismissed Facts [1] On 16 October 2013, FB purchased a 2007 Isuzu NQR75-2 7500GVM truck cab and chassis from TY 2004 Ltd (TY), and immediately converted it into a motor home...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 5 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 89 APPLICANT TN RESPONDENT U Ltd The Tribunal orders: 1. U Ltd is to pay TN the sum of $800.00 within 21 days of the date of this order. Reasons 1. In or about March 2017, TN entered into a contract with U Ltd for the supply and installation of a window in a bedroom at his home. U Ltd engaged a building contractor to remove the...
...1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 125 APPLICANT BX APPLICANT HX RESPONDENT L Ltd The Tribunal orders: L Ltd is to pay the sum of $1,075.47 to BX and HX on or before Wednesday, 1 May 2024. The balance of the claim is dismissed. REASONS 1. The Applicants, BX and HX, wished to attend a special occasion in [town 1], in early February 2023. They decided to drive from their home in [town 2] to [town 1]. They booked a ferry crossing for two pas...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 173 APPLICANT FG Ltd RESPONDENT SB SECOND RESPONDENT ID Limited The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons: 1. At about 5am on the 13th of July 2022 ST was travelling on [road] when the vehicle owned by his company ([FG Ltd]), hit a large pothole causing damage to the vehicle and making the vehicle undr...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2023] NZDT 706 APPLICANT ET RESPONDENT NG The Tribunal orders: NG is to pay ET and ST the sum of $2,500.00 within 28 days of the date of this order. Reasons 1. In June 2022, ET and ST entered into a contract with NG (trading as NN) whereby NG agreed to provide photography services for ET and ST wedding day on 22 April 2023. The contract...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2022] NZDT 178 APPLICANT KH RESPONDENT KL The Tribunal orders: KL is to pay KH $130.00 on or before 1 November 2022. Reasons 1. Mr KH placed a motherboard for sale on U. He says Mr KL placed the winning bid for $290.00 but did not complete the purchase. Mr KH then relisted the mother bo...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 463 APPLICANT LQ and QQ RESPONDENT T Ltd The Tribunal orders: T Ltd is to pay the sum of $1,275.07 to LQ and QQ immediately. Reasons: 1. This amended order is made under the “slip rule”1. It changes the amount of the original order, and the calculation of that sum in the last paragraph of the original order...