Search Results

1. 19 April Legal Aid News [pdf, 289 KB]

   ...help. We’ve also included links to the Operational Policy along with answers to questions raised during the FLAS, Family Legal Aid Changes and Review of Family Fixed Fees Webinar. The FLAS went live on 31 March 2014. Since then, more than 230 claims have been paid to FLAS providers. Eligibility compliance checks We’ll shortly be starting compliance checks on groups of FLAS providers. The aim is to check that only eligible clients are receiving the funded service and that any...

2. EMPC Practical guide to litigating in the Employment Court [pdf, 286 KB]

   ...2 The Court’s jurisdiction is broad, but not unlimited. It includes: 3 - Challenges against determinations of the Authority; - Actions for the recovery of penalties under the Act; - Questions of law referred to it by the Authority; - Applications for special leave to have matters before the Authority removed into the Court; - To hear and determine matters removed to it from the Authority (first instance hearing); - Questions as to whether any person is to be declared an

3. CT v XD LCRO 218 / 2010 (10 June 2011) [pdf, 88 KB]

   ...to a plethora of telephone conversations. [5] At some stage between 5 March 2009 and 29 May 2009, the Respondent ceased his association with CU and the Applicant’s file was in the care of other lawyers engaged by CU. [6] The Applicant’s claim was unsuccessful following a ruling by the Employment Relations Authority that the Applicant was not an employee and a costs order was made against him. [7] The Applicant alleges that he was led to believe by the Respondent that his cla...

4. UX & H Ltd v K Ltd [2024] NZDT 717 (26 August 2024) [pdf, 140 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 717 APPLICANT UX RESPONDENT K Ltd APPLICANT'S INSURER (if applicable) H Ltd The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons: 1. A commercial wheelie bin owned by K Ltd was caught by a gust of wind and hit a car owned by UX causing damage to the car. UX and his insurer seek an order that K Ltd are liable to pay them...

5. ACC and ACD v ZYA [2013] NZDT 111 (18 March 2013) [pdf, 46 KB]

   ...with reasonable care and skill, to the point where it is reasonable that the work should be redone. [6] ZYA states that the substrate was unsatisfactory to the point where a satisfactory job was not possible and that this was made known to the Applicants before and during the course of the work. ACC and ACD deny this and state that if that were the case he should not have commenced the work or carried on with it. [7] On this basis, I find that ZYA is in breach of the guara...

6. Senadipathi & Xavier v Sampang [2015] NZIACDT 43 (20 April 2015) [pdf, 95 KB]

   ...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...

7. Holden —Nga Taonga Tuturu (2010) 245 Aotea MB 230 (245 AOT 230) [pdf, 134 KB]

   ...claimed by Te Atiawa then ownership should vest in that iwi. [2] Soon after expressions of interest were lodged by Vivienne Taueki and Richard Takuira of Muaūpoko. Following that, the Muaūpoko Tribal Authority also expressed an interest in claiming ownership of the tāonga. 245 Aotea MB 231 [3] The issue for determination is whether or not there is sufficient evidence before the Court to confirm ownership of any tāonga in any of the groups claiming an interest....

8. IQ & OU v EQ [2022] NZDT 278 (19 December 2022) [pdf, 183 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2022] NZDT 278 APPLICANT IQ APPLICANT OU RESPONDENT EQ The Tribunal orders: EQ is to pay to IQ and OU $2,000.00 on or before 5:00pm on Friday 10 March 2023. Reasons 1. On 4 November 2021, EQ provided IQ and OU a quote of $4,000.00 for work that included clearing topsoil off their front lawn, side and back yard. On 23 November...

9. TD v D Ltd [2022] NZDT 70 (1 June 2022) [pdf, 100 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...

10. TN v JH and GG [2020] 1321 NZDT (14 September 2020) [pdf, 212 KB]

    CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2020] NZDT 1321 APPLICANT TN WL RESPONDENT JH and GG The Tribunal orders: 1. JH and GG are to pay to TN and WL the sum of $1,450.00 on or before 30 September 2020. Reasons 1. In July 2020, TN and WL (the purchasers) bought a Mazda Demio from Mr H and Ms G (the sellers) for $1,800.00. 2. The car has turned out to be too ru