12946 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 1687 APPLICANT DX APPLICANT SX RESPONDENT TZ The Tribunal orders: TZ is to pay DX and SX $1,430.59 on or before Friday 18 June 2021. Reasons: 1. DX & SX share a property boundary with TZ. DX & SX returned to their home after work on 4 December 2020 to find TZ had cut down a substa
...seeks to amend succession orders dated 1 September 1998 at 90 Whakatāne MB 405-407 and 28 January 2000 at 92 Whakatāne MB 250-251 relating to Paratene Mita Hotene (“the deceased”) who is the great uncle of the applicant. [2] Both orders are claimed by the applicant to be incorrect because of a mistake, error or omission in the presentation of the facts of the case to the Court, namely, the misidentification of two of the four children of Kereopa Hotene who was the brother of t...
...negligent and breached the Immigration Advisers Code of Conduct 2010 (the Code). [2] The relevant events relate to a point in time when the complainants and their family were in New Zealand unlawfully. However, the family had had their residence application referred back to Immigration New Zealand by the Residence Review Board. The complainants paid Ms Tangilanu to apply for visas to end their unlawful status, and she was dealing with the residence application. [3] Ms Tangilanu took so...
...Compensation Act 2001] ___________________________________________________________________________ [1] The appellant has appealed against a review decision dated 7 October 2021. In this decision, the reviewer concluded that the appellant’s review application of 6 May 2021 was not in respect of a reviewable decision. The reviewer therefore dismissed the application for want of jurisdiction. Background [2] The appellant has cover for a physical injury and post-traumatic stress d...
...is required. First, it was not strictly necessary for the Trustees to prepare the strike out and security for costs applications in advance of the first hearing of this application. Second, it is not appropriate 105 Tākitimu MB 206 to claim costs for preparing the costs application. Third, it is not appropriate to claim an allowance for further work required to finalise the costs application. I therefore adjust the total legal costs properly incurred by the Trustees to $6,...
...s178 of the Employment Relations Act 2000 (“the Act”) to remove Mr Dickson’s proceedings to this Court for hearing at first instance. [2] At about 5.30 pm yesterday the plaintiff, Wesley Community Action Trust (“the Trust”), requested the Court to consider urgently this issue on the basis of copies of proceedings filed with the Authority, exchanges of correspondence between the parties, and a covering letter to the Court. Mr Cullen, counsel for the plaintiff,...
...IN THE MĀORI LAND COURT OF NEW ZEALAND TAITOKERAU DISTRICT 38 Taitokerau MB 219 (38 TTK 219) A20050019948 UNDER Section 18(1)(c) Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993 IN THE MATTER OF Waipoua 2B2B1B BETWEEN GARRY HOOKER Applicant AND DIRECTOR-GENERAL OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION Respondent Hearing: 32 Taitokerau MB 271, 21 November 2011 (Heard at Auckland) Appearances: Mr R Ferguson for the Applicant Mr G Hulbert for the Department...
...intended as temporary assistance to be provided when costs are not met in any other way. Ms Jaura said that since 2011 the agent has provided limited verification of costs related to Disability Allowance and Special Benefit, despite the Ministry’s requests for updated evidence of the additional costs she claimed. [18] The agent did provide further information before this hearing, but Ms Jaura said that the more recent records show that the appellant’s expenditure has reduced...
LEGAL COMPLAINTS REVIEW OFFICER ĀPIHA AROTAKE AMUAMU Ā-TURE [2020] NZLCRO 223 LCRO 24/2020 CONCERNING an application for review pursuant to section 193 of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 AND CONCERNING a determination of the [Area] Standards Committee [X] BETWEEN TN Applicant AND [AREA] STANDARDS COMMITTEE [X] Respondent DECISION The names and identifying details of the parties in this decision have been changed. Introd
...complaint to the Complaints Service, but given that it was raised and discussed at the hearing, I will record my comments in respect thereof. [12] The Applicant and his daughter attended a hearing in Christchurch on 21 July 2011. The Respondent was informed of the place and date of the hearing, but was not required to attend. He did not do so. 3 [13] Matters raised in the review application were addressed by the Standards Committee in some detail. Given that the result of t...