12987 items matching your search terms
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 789 APPLICANT T Ltd RESPONDENT EH SECOND RESPONDENT OH THIRD OR SUBSEQUENT RESPONDENT DH THIRD OR SUBSEQUENT RESPONDENT Z Ltd The Tribunal orders: 1. The claim is dismissed. Reasons: 1. T Ltd and EH and OH own adjoining rural properties at [settlement] in [region]. T Ltd’s property is used for forestry and...
...discovered that, without her knowledge, the shares and directorship had been transferred to someone else, she addressed a request to the company for access to all 2 the personal information held by the company about her. In particular, she requested the share transfer form, the notice of resignation as director and corresponding Board resolutions. The company made no response. Extraordinarily, the day prior to the hearing before the Tribunal, she reappeared on the New Zealand Com...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 5 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2019] NZDT 1339 APPLICANT X Ltd RESPONDENT K Ltd The Tribunal orders: 1. K Ltd is to pay to X Ltd the sum of $456.78 on or before 10 October 2019. Reasons 1. X Ltd (X Ltd) contracted K Ltd (K Ltd) to supply bottled lubricant for resale to clients in the medical industry. As part of the supply, K Ltd was to attach pre-printed...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 759 APPLICANT NE APPLICANT QE RESPONDENT LH The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons: 1. At the start of September 2022 NE and QE purchased a home in [address] from LH, undertaking some renovations before moving in permanently in October that year. They say they immediately encountered drainage issues with t
...requested that Mr AB make an appointment to discuss further options. [19] Ms OC relayed the outcome of the application to Mr NS in correspondence dated 6 September 2013. She confirmed that after having discussed the matter with Mr BR, she had formed a view that an application should be made for a visa pursuant to s 61 of the Immigration Act 2009 (s 61 application). This application was to be based on an offer of employment that Mrs RJ had received. [20] On 16 September 2013, M...
IN THE WEATHERTIGHT HOMES TRIBUNAL TRI-2009-101-000025 [2012] NZWHT AUCKLAND 51 BETWEEN GREGORY JOHN MCDONALD Claimant AND TIMOTHY EDWARD PETERS First Respondent AND BUILDING APPROVALS AND SOLUTIONS LIMITED Second Respondent AND MIKE HISLOP Third Respondent AND NEILL BROWN Fourth Respondent AND CARLTON RICHARDS Fifth Respondent AND NELSON CITY COUNCIL (Removed) Sixth Respondent AND GRAEME SCOTT Seventh Respondent AND PHILIP HILLEARD E
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2023] NZDT 725 APPLICANT DN and EN RESPONDENT R Ltd The Tribunal orders: R Ltd is to pay DN and EN $3,220.00 within 28 days. R Ltd did not appear at the hearing. Reasons [1] DN and EN booked return flights from [City] to [Country 1] with R Ltd. They claim that R Ltd unjustifiably refused to allow them on the flight that was to leave [City], and
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 542 APPLICANT MN RESPONDENT QL The Tribunal orders: 1. The claim by MN against QL is proved. 2. The counterclaim by QL against MN is dismissed. 3. QL is to pay MN the sum of $20,000.00 on or before 5:00 pm on 21 August 2024. Reasons 1. In April 2022 MN paid QL $13,000.00 in cash and $7,000.00 in a bank transfer. MN claims that he lo...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2022] NZDT 45 APPLICANT EQ RESPONDENT MT Ltd The Tribunal orders: MT Ltd is to pay EQ the sum of $30,000.00 on or before 1 June 2022. Reasons: 1. In November 2021 EQ contracted to do earthworks at his property in [Town]. As part of the contract, fill taken from other sites would be delivered and used on the property. After the work...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 725 APPLICANT BI RESPONDENT O Inc The Tribunal orders: The claim by BI is dismissed. Reasons 1. BI was a member of the O Inc. From 2022, he became unhappy with the views and services being provided by O Inc. He began voicing these concerns. Ultimately, after a series of complaints and counter-complaints, BI was expelled from O Inc....