Search Results

1. ZA v YB LCRO 164/2013 (31 August 2016) [pdf, 93 KB]

   ...action in relation to Mr [ZA]’s complaints about Mr [YB]’s conduct was not necessary or appropriate, pursuant to s 138(2) of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 (the Act). Background [2] Mr [YB] acted for Ms [RI] and her husband, Mr [PK], as claimants in a claim (the claim) to the Weathertight Homes Tribunal (the WHT). A translator was involved to assist communication between Mr [YB] and his clients. Ms [RI]’s father, Mr [RI], was also involved in the claim process. The WHT...

2. MK v S Ltd [2023] NZDT 293 (1 August 2023) [pdf, 196 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 5 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 293 APPLICANT MK RESPONDENT S Ltd The Tribunal orders: 1. S Ltd is to pay MK $4,397.12 on or before Friday 25 August 2023. 2. MK is to safely pack up and arrange for the return all the curtains purchased from S Ltd to them, with shipping of the boxes with the curtains to be paid for by S Ltd. Reasons: 3. MK, th...

3. White v Rodney District Council [pdf, 24 KB]

   ...The Tribunal orders the correction of that date to read 13 February 2002, pursuant to section 92(2)(b) of the Weathertight Homes Resolution Services Act 2006 (the Act). This section empowers the Tribunal to correct minor errors. Costs Application 3. On 16 March 2009, the claimants, through their counsel, filed a comprehensive memorandum seeking an award of costs against the second respondent, Mrs L J Kerkin, of $50,000 together with disbursements of $23,509.50. The ap...

4. M Ltd v CQ [2023] NZDT 571 (17 November 2023) [pdf, 90 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2023] NZDT 571 APPLICANT M Ltd RESPONDENT CQ The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons 1. M Ltd was engaged by CQ to provide digging services in preparation for siting of a tiny home. An initial price of $7668.18 was too high for CQ’s budget so the scope of work was adjusted and M Ltd provided a new price of $2730.05 which was ac...

5. QH v N Ltd & T Ltd [2024] NZDT 523 (8 July 2024) [pdf, 187 KB]

   ...something prevented the proper decision from being made: for example, the relevant information was not available at the time. If you wish to apply for a rehearing, you can apply online, download a form from the Disputes Tribunal website or obtain an application form from any Tribunal office. The application must be lodged within 20 working days of the decision having been made. If you are applying outside of the 20 working day timeframe, you must also fill out an Application for Reheari...

6. EN v ML [2022] NZDT 257 (19 December 2022) [pdf, 188 KB]

   ...something prevented the proper decision from being made: for example, the relevant information was not available at the time. If you wish to apply for a rehearing, you can apply online, download a form from the Disputes Tribunal website or obtain an application form from any Tribunal office. The application must be lodged within 20 working days of the decision having been made. If you are applying outside of the 20 working day timeframe, you must also fill out an Application for Reheari...

7. HD v NU [2023] NZDT 118 (9 March 2023) [pdf, 201 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 5 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 118 APPLICANT HD RESPONDENT NU The Tribunal orders: NU is to pay $8,908.83 to HD on or before Friday 24 March 2023. Reasons: 1. HD purchased a four hectare lifestyle property from NU pursuant to a written agreement dated 25 November 2021. On 28 January 2022 HD took possession and within two weeks the toilet overflowe...

8. [2023] NZSSAA 7 (30 March 2023) [pdf, 260 KB]

   ...counsel, and N Jaura, appeals officer, for the Ministry of Social Development FINAL DECISON Introduction [1] XXXX’s appeal is against the Ministry of Social Development’s (the Ministry) decision of 8 July 2019 to decline her application for home help domestic emergency support (DES), also referred to as ‘home help’, for the period 1 August 2019 to 10 November 2019.1 [2] XXXX has also made subsequent applications for DES for periods after 10 November 2019. T...

9. BM & OT v OE & DE [2023] NZDT 459 (5 July 2023) [pdf, 201 KB]

   ...459 APPLICANT BM and OT RESPONDENT OE and DE The Tribunal orders: OE and DE are to pay $30,000.00 to BM and OT by 1/8/23. Reasons: 1. This order should be read with that dated 17/3/23. Misrepresentation? 2. The applicants rely on the applicable clauses in the sale and purchase agreement as to misrepresentation. It is important to note again that a representation to be a misrepresentation does not need to be intentionally false, it may be innocently ma...

10. LCRO 144/2024 NQ v PW (28 March 2025) [pdf, 187 KB]

    ...withdrew its provisional agreement to withdraw the Crimes Act charge and sought undertakings from the husband and the applicant to remove the company from the Companies Register and not to be involved in any way in any similar business. 3 [13] The requested undertakings were given, the Crimes Act charge was withdrawn, convictions were entered on the Fair Trading Act charges and substantial fines were imposed on the company, the husband and the applicant. [14] The respondent charge...