13121 items matching your search terms
...Section 49 of the Act provides that a claimant may apply to the Chair seeking a review of a decision that their claim does not comply with the eligibility criteria within 20 working days of receiving notice of the decision. On receiving such an application I must decide whether or not the claim meets the eligibility criteria. [4] I have considered the following documents in conducting my review: • The application for review and attached information. • The letter dated...
...5 April 2013. Facts [1] On 30 May 2012, ABZ’s daughter had parked ABZ’s car outside a friend’s house in front of the garage. While it was parked, it was impacted by ZYE while she was reversing. [2] ABZ and her insurer, ACA Ltd, claim $1,307.26 being the assessed cost of repairs. [3] ZYE accepts liability for the impact and ZYD Ltd (the Respondent’s insurer) accepts the assessment as fair for the damage incurred in the 30 May incident. However, ZYD Ltd disputes...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 5 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2021] NZDT 1494 APPLICANT ME APPLICANT NN RESPONDENT QU Limited The Tribunal orders: QU is to pay ME and NN $4,000.00 on or before Monday 24 May 2021. Reasons 1. ME and NN purchased a [package] tour, planned for 28 April to 25 May 2020, from QU Ltd trading as QU. The price per person was $22,696.00, based on
...beginning of the substantive hearing programme in 2017. Contained in this issue are deadlines and information to help you prepare for the first hearing week. We include information about the Statement of Issues, the hearing programme and the list of claims participating in the hearing phase. In the research update we summarise recent additions to the record and discuss the forthcoming gap-filling project examining aspects of the eviction of Winiata Te Whaaro and his people from Poko...
...LIMITED T/A TE PUNA LIQUOR CENTRE [2020] NZEmpC 184 [6 November 2020] IN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND I TE KŌTI TAKE MAHI O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU [2020] NZEmpC 184 EMPC 339/2020 IN THE MATTER OF an application for a freezing order BETWEEN A LABOUR INSPECTOR OF THE MINISTRY OF BUSINESS, INNOVATION AND EMPLOYMENT Applicant AND SAMRA HOLDINGS LIMITED T/A TE PUNA LIQUOR CENTRE First Respondent AND...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2021] NZDT 1654 APPLICANT DH RESPONDENT KQ The Tribunal orders: KQ is to pay DH the sum of $495.00 on or before 29 November 2021. Reasons: 1. DH purchased an electric scooter via TradeMe from KQ. In the TradeMe advertisement KQ described the scooter as a [scooter model]. He copied the specifications from another website,...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 81 APPLICANT DI RESPONDENT EL SECOND RESPONDENT N Ltd APPLICANT'S INSURER (if applicable) X Ltd The Tribunal orders: EL’s insurer (N Ltd) is to pay DI’s insurer (X Ltd) $4,679.06 on or before 27 February 2024. Reasons: 1. There was a collision between a car driven DI and a car driven by EL. The collision...
...defend the proceedings brought against them in the District Court by BE. 6. As Claim 503 and Claim 19 relate to the same facts, they were heard together before me in person at the [City] Court on 1 July 2024. CN and MN attended the hearing as the Applicants. KN attended the hearing as the Respondent of Claim 503. HW attended the hearing on behalf of W Ltd, the Respondent of Claim 19, and was appointed as W Ltd’s representative. 7. This order sets out my findings in relation to bo...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 404 APPLICANT TU RESPONDENT SM SECOND RESPONDENT S Ltd The Tribunal orders: 1. SM is to: a. return the food truck to TU on or by 30 September 2023, and b. pay TU $1,500 on or by 30 September 2023. Reasons 2. SM and TU were friends for some years. Both operated food businesses. In November 202...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 386 APPLICANT VH Ltd RESPONDENT KI The Tribunal orders: 1. KI is not liable to pay the sum of $13801.15 to VH Ltd. 2. VH Ltd’s claim is dismissed. Reasons: 1. This dispute arises as a result of email hacking, more formally known as business comprise (BEC) fraud. In September-October 2023 VH Ltd carried out lands...