Search Results

1. Ratima v Accident Compensation Corporation (Costs on appeal) [2023] NZACC 44 [pdf, 138 KB]

   ...Introduction [1] This matter arises out of an appeal from the decision of a Reviewer dated 18 October 2022. The Reviewer dismissed an application for review of the Corporation’s 13 January 2022 decision declining cover in relation to Mr Ratima’s claim that he suffered treatment injury by reason of being incorrectly diagnosed with schizophrenia in 2010. [2] On 20 October 2022, Mr Ratima filed a Notice of Appeal against the Reviewer’s decision of 18 October 2022, with an acc...

2. LI v WH Ltd [2021] NZDT 1697 (13 November 2021) [pdf, 153 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2021] NZDT 1697 APPLICANT LI RESPONDENT WH Ltd APPLICANT'S INSURER (if applicable) DBJ Ltd The Tribunal orders: 1. WH Ltd is to pay LI $2,000.00 on or before 7 December 2021. Reasons: 1. In or around July 2021, LI purchased a vehicle from someone in [City 1] via Trademe. LI engaged the services of WH Ltd to...

3. Algie & Ors v ACC [2013] NZACA 1 [pdf, 118 KB]

   ...BEFORE THE ACCIDENT COMPENSATION APPEAL AUTHORITY R Bedford HEARING at Wellington on 7 & 9 November 2012 APPEARANCES/COUNSEL Mr J Miller for appellant Mr P McBride for respondent DECISION Introduction [1] The appeal is brought as a form of class or representative action under the aegis of the named appellant and 20 other appellants in respect of retrospective claims for backdated attendant care payments under the 1972 and 1982 Acts. [2] At the Authority’s direct...

4. Howard v Accident Compensation Corporation (Interpretation of decision) [2024] NZACC 41 [pdf, 239 KB]

   ...Compensation Corporation [2014] NZSC 2431. 6 Howard v Accident Compensation Corporation [2017] NZACC 76. 4 [25] It is of serious concern that precious court resources continue to be taken up in advancing essentially the same argument in different forms. This litigation may justify an application under s 166 of the Senior Courts Act 2016, which is intended to restrain the unwarranted and vexatious use of the court process for cases that have no merit. … [27] The Corporation...

5. Koia - Wharekahika A13 - Potaka Marae (2006) 75 Ruatoria MB 155 (75 RUA 155) [pdf, 703 KB]

   Minute Book: 75 RUA 155 IN THE MAORI LAND COURT HAMILTON Hearing: Judgment: A20060024560 75 RUATORIA MB 155-166 UNDER Section 19(1)(b) ofTe Ture Whenua Maori Act 1993 IN THE MATTER OF Wharekahika A13 Block - Potaka Marae Ex parte application Chambers, Hamilton 21 September 2006 JASONKOIA Applicant DECISION OF JUDGE S TE A MILROY [1] Mr Koia applied for an injunction pursuant to section 19(1)(b) of Te Ture Whenua Maori Act 1993 ("the Act") to prevent the tr...

6. Human Rights Act 1993

   ...– termination on grounds of pregnancy, physical disability or impairment – Human Rights Act 1993, s 22(1)(c) Beauchamp v B & T Co (2011) Ltd [2022] NZHRRT 10 McClelland v Schindler Lifts NZ Ltd [2015] NZHRRT 45 Comparator group – Part 1A claim – principles to be applied in identifying comparator Adoption Action Inc v Attorney-General [2016] NZHRRT 9 Consolidation – proceedings brought variously under Human Rights Act 1993 and Privacy Act 1993 – whether commonality between pr...

   Located in:

   1. Tribunals >
   2. Human rights >
   3. Decisions - Index

7. Bisschoff v Yerman [2015] NZIACDT 101 (11 December 2015) [pdf, 165 KB]

   ...wished to migrate to New Zealand and approached her. They say: [1.1] Ms Yerman agreed to provide immigration services for a fee, payable before they left South Africa for New Zealand. [1.2] Ms Yerman assessed their eligibility to migrate from a form they completed. They then met with Mr Yerman, Ms Yerman’s husband; he is not a licensed immigration adviser. He advised the Bisschoffs that Mr Bisschoff’s occupation was not on the list of qualifications that allow migration to New Zeal...

8. HI v D Ltd and FB [2024] NZDT 26 (20 February 2024) [pdf, 233 KB]

   ...(Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 26 APPLICANT HI RESPONDENT D Ltd RESPONDENT FB The Tribunal orders: 1. The name of respondent FS is amended to FB. 2. The claim is dismissed. Reasons: 1. HI is based in [Town]. In late September 2023 he was advised that a close family member was seriously ill. He was required to travel at short notice and booked flights to [City 1] and then attempted to book...

9. [2024] NZEnvC 266 McCallum Bros Limited v Auckland Council [pdf, 373 KB]

   ...Limited v Auckland Council IN THE ENVIRONMENT COURT AT AUCKLAND I TE KŌTI TAIAO O AOTEAROA KI TĀMAKI MAKAURAU Decision [2024] NZEnvC 266 IN THE MATTER OF an appeal under s 120 of the Resource Management Act 1991 AND IN THE MATTER OF applications for costs under s 285 of the Resource Management Act 1991 BETWEEN MCCALLUM BROS LIMITED (ENV-2022-AKL-121) Appellant AND AUCKLAND COUNCIL Respondent Court: Judge J A Smith Judge A H C Warren Hearing: On the...

10. AFG and AFH v ZUO [2013] NZDT 351 (17 November 2013) [pdf, 56 KB]

    IN THE DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2013] NZDT 351 BETWEEN AFG FIRST APPLICANT AND AFH SECOND APPLICANT AND ZUO Ltd RESPONDENT Date of Order: 17 November 2013 Referee: Referee Stewart ORDER OF THE DISPUTES TRIBUNAL The Tribunal hereby orders that AFH is joined as an Applicant. ZUO Ltd is to pay AFG and AFH the sum of $3120.0 within 7 days from the release date of this decision. Facts [1] ZUO Ltd