12948 items matching your search terms
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 329 APPLICANT ND APPLICANT UT RESPONDENT HX The Tribunal orders: The application is dismissed. UT is to pay HX $1257.20 on or before the 24th of August 2023. Reasons: Introduction: UT and HX are neighbours at rural properties in [Town]. UT is the registered owner of a [dog] named A. The dog is cared for...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 619 APPLICANT OT RESPONDENT XQ Ltd The Tribunal orders: A. OT is to pay $2,400.00 to XQ Ltd on or before 19 September 2024. B. There is a declaration under section 10(1)(b) of the Disputes Tribunal Act 1988 that no further sums are payable to XQ Ltd by OT, as at 22 August 2024. Reasons 1. During about March 2024, OT parked his c...
...agreement, and did not attend to the various disclosure requirements. [2.2] He offered one of the complainants employment, and said that would allow her to qualify for a work visa. The employment was not satisfactory to qualify for a work visa. [2.3] The application for a visa failed, and Mr Sampang advised one of the complainants to continue to work for him; it was unlawful for her to do so. [2.4] He then failed to record his advice in writing. [3] Mr Sampang has not responded to the...
LCRO 242/2010 CONCERNING An application for review pursuant to Section 193 of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 AND CONCERNING a determination of the Nelson Standards Committee BETWEEN Ms IB Of [South Island] Applicant AND Mr QY and the partners of AEH of [South Island] Respondent The names and identifying details of the parties in this decision have been changed. DECISION [1] The review Applicant is Ms IB who, via her counsel Mr M...
IN THE DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2014] NZDT 602 BETWEEN BX APPLICANT AND ABC LIMITED APPLICANT’S INSURER AND YC RESPONDENT Date of Order: 3 March 2014 Referee: Referee Reuvecamp ORDER OF THE DISPUTES TRIBUNAL The Tribunal hereby orders that the respondent YC pay the applicant’s insurer ABC Limited the amount of $15,000.00 on or before 31 March 2014 or as otherwise agreed in writing between the parties. Material Facts [1]...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 623 APPLICANT CN RESPONDENT U Ltd The Tribunal orders: Claim Dismissed. REASONS: Brief Details of Claim 1. On or about 20 August 2023, CN registered for the [event] in [city 1] to be held between [dates] . The rally was run by U Ltd . CN made her registration through a third-party website (FQ). Two or three days after registering h...
...or artificial watercourse or live fence, or any ditch or channel or raised ground that serves as a dividing fence”. Therefore, a hedge may be included as a “live fence” if it serves as a dividing fence between adjoining properties. 7. ZD claimed that the survey proved the stumps of the hedge were on his land, around 30-40 cm from the boundary line. However, HX responded that ZD had measured the furthest distance and other stumps were closer to the line. He also provided evidence t...
...JIAN ZHANG v PANDA RESTAURANT LIMITED [2022] NZEmpC 139 [9 August 2022] IN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND I TE KŌTI TAKE MAHI O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU [2022] NZEmpC 139 EMPC 238/2022 IN THE MATTER OF an application for a freezing order BETWEEN JIAN ZHANG Applicant AND PANDA RESTAURANT LIMITED First Respondent AND TAO ECHO FENG Second Respondent Hearing: 8 August 2022 (Heard at Christchurch via...
...was partly based on the pleadings of the parties in ARC 23/12, but also that the actions against Mr Roest and Ms Park could not succeed on the face of the pleadings in ARC 102/13. This application was opposed by Mr Matsuoka. [5] While these applications were progressing, the substantive proceedings in both actions had become bogged down in disputes over disclosure of documents. Such disputes involved not only the parties but non-parties, including members of a group of companies...
...details of the various repair costs as particularised by the Claimants. Consequential Damages [63] The claimants also seek consequential damages being interest incurred by the claimants with the cost of remedial work carried out at their request. There is a further claim for general damages. 21 Special Damages [64] In Taylor v Auto Trade Supply Ltd & Anor13 the High Court discussed matters pertaining to special damages. In that case, the Court al...