12972 items matching your search terms
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 492 APPLICANT U Ltd RESPONDENT NG The Tribunal orders: NG is to pay $217.00 to U Ltd before 1 August 2024. Reasons 1. On 7 March 2024 NG obtained an online estimate of $310.00 from U Ltd for it to provide him with house cleaning services on 25 March 2024. 2. On 8 March 2024 U Ltd emailed NG to say ‘thank you for booking your...
...NOEL BARNES Third Respondent AND MASTER BUILD SERVICES LIMITED (Removed) Fourth Respondent AND PLASTER SYSTEMS LIMITED Fifth Respondent Decision: 16 February 2012 COST DETERMINATION Adjudicator: K D Kilgour COSTS APPLICATION BY AUCKLAND COUNCIL [1] The Council was removed from this proceeding on 10 September 2010 in Procedural Order No 7. [2] The claimants appealed that determination and also judicially reviewed the Eligibility Decisions of the...
...MATTER of a referral under s 48 of the Immigration Advisers Licensing Act 2007 BY The Registrar of Immigration Advisers Registrar BETWEEN K L Complainant AND Mijin Kim Adviser THE NAME AND ANY INFORMATION IDENTIFYING THE COMPLAINANT IS NOT TO BE PUBLISHED DECISION REPRESENTATION: Registrar: In person. Complainant: In person. Adviser: In person. Date Issued: 4 June 2015 2 DECISION...
Page 1 of 5 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 369 APPLICANT TQ RESPONDENT UM SECOND RESPONDENT CM THIRD RESPONDENT FOURTH RESPONDENT HT N Limited The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons: 1. TQ obtained a jetski from UM. It had been advertised as having a fully rebuilt engine. 2. Shortly after obtaining the jetski, he too...
...(the USB) and personal cellphone from his desk at the Stonewood office. One week later BMN’s employment was terminated. [2] Despite requests Stonewood did not return BMN’s personal information that they had collected from him. [3] BMN claims Stonewood has interfered with his privacy by collecting his personal information in breach of the Privacy Act 1993 (the Act).3 [4] Stonewood acknowledges it took BMN’s work laptop and personal cellphone but deny taking the USB and den...
...Payment 16 3 Fee schedule 16 Change of lawyers 16 Disbursements 16 Travel 16 Interpreters/translators 17 Payment arrangements 17 Relationship with Legal Aid 18 Court entry 18 Concurrent legal aid cases 18 Without Notice applications 18 Appendix 1 – Glossary 19 Appendix 2 – Financial Eligibility Thresholds 21 Appendix 3 – Funding Declaration Form Example 22 Appendix 4 – Family Legal Advice Service (FLAS) Stages 25 Appendix 5 – Family Legal Advice...
...4 July 2023 DiM,il3D Section 9(2)(a) Tenakoe llll Justice Centre I 19 Aitken, Street OX SX10088 I Wellington T 04 918 8800 I F 04 918 8820 ContactUs@justice.govt.nz I www.justice.govt.nz Our ref: OIA 105137 Official Information Act request: Independent Electoral Review information Thank you for your email of 8 June 2023, requesting, under the Official Information Act 1982 (the Act), information regarding the Independent Electoral Review. Your requests and my responses are...
...276/2013 LCRO 293/2013 LCRO 242/2016 CONCERNING an application for review pursuant to section 193 of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 AND CONCERNING two determinations of the [Area] Standards Committee BETWEEN CS Applicant/Respondent AND VN, PR AND ZW Respondents/Applicants The names and identifying details of the parties in this decision have been changed. DECISION Introduction [1] Mr VN, Mr PR and Ms ZW (the complainants) and M...
Page 1 of 6 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2023] NZDT 598 APPLICANT K Ltd RESPONDENT V Ltd The Tribunal orders: 1. V Ltd is to pay K Ltd $19,999.00 by Monday 18 December 2023. 2. Upon payment of the $19,999.00 to K Ltd, ownership of the [truck] is to immediately be transferred to V Ltd. 3. V Ltd can arrange for collection of the [truck] from [city 1], at their cost. Reasons: 1. K, represe...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 794 APPLICANT OD RESPONDENT JE The Tribunal orders: Claim: The claim is dismissed. Counterclaim: The counterclaim is dismissed. Reasons The claim [1] OD purchased a car from JE. She discovered after the purchase that the car was defective, and she seeks a refund and other costs from him. JE counterclaims for costs he has incurred in...