Search Results

1. LA-familyproceedings-steps.pdf [pdf, 513 KB]

   ...proceedings involving adoption under the Adoption Act 1955 Granting Notes Application to Dispense with Consent (when combined with Application for Adoption Order) – Proceedings Step 1 The following issues should be considered before undertaking and claiming this activity: • The application to dispense with consent is a separate application from the application for an adoption order, and will be the subject of a separate hearing. • The s10 report from the social worker is su...

2. JN & TN v CI [2023] NZDT 492 (5 October 2023) [pdf, 96 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 492 APPLICANT JN APPLICANT TN RESPONDENT CI APPLICANT'S INSURER (if applicable) W Ltd The Tribunal orders: CI is to pay W Ltd $20,726.62 by Wednesday 1 November 2023. Reasons: 1. JN, TN and BC from W Ltd attended the hearing by teleconference, as did CI and his mother, ML, as his support pe...

3. LX v HO Limited [2019] NZDT 1428 (19 June 2019) [pdf, 113 KB]

   ...Use Agreement (the Agreement) that provided for payment for this installation. 3. Soon afterwards, the parties disputed the sum owed, and the company stopped using the site. LX has not yet been paid for the use of the land. LX has filed a claim seeking $8,010.00 for usage dating back to 2010. The company disputes the sum owed on the basis that it should only pay for usage in 2017 and 2018. 4. The issues to be resolved are: (a) How much is owed under the Agreement for 2017...

4. SJ & NY v XT Ltd [2021] NZDT 1644 (6 October 2021) [pdf, 206 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2021] NZDT 1644 APPLICANT SJ and NY RESPONDENT XT Ltd The Tribunal orders: SJ and NY are not liable to pay XT Ltd Services Limited the sum of $289.80, being a portion of the sum invoiced between February and October 2020. Reasons: 1. In December 2018 XT Ltd relocated the water meter for SJ and NY’s rental property at [addr

5. TQ v EN [2023] NZDT 113 (2 June 2023) [pdf, 192 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 113 APPLICANT TQ RESPONDENT EN The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons 1. TQ bred [Dog], a [dog breed], and sold her to EN on 23 December 2021. The parties signed a contract which provided, at clause 5, that ‘The Buyer represents … that … Buyer will have the dog spayed or neutered by the age of six m...

6. XB v KI [2022] NZDT 226 (5 December 2022) [pdf, 198 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2022] NZDT 226 APPLICANT XB RESPONDENT KI The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons: 1. In October 2022, KI placed an advert for a 2015 Mazda CX-5 on Trade Me. 2. XB saw the advert and contacted KI regarding the car. 3. XB met with KI and test drove the car. He purchased the car for $14,250.00. 4. X...

7. U Ltd v KG Ltd [2024] NZDT 477 (6 June 2024) [pdf, 93 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 477 APPLICANT U Ltd RESPONDENT KG Ltd The Tribunal orders: KG Ltd is to pay U Ltd $3,450.00 within 28 days. Reasons [1] U Ltd, represented by director SI, claims from KG Ltd, represented by directors LN and TF, $3,450.00 for goods and services supplied by U Ltd to KG Ltd. KG Ltd says that the work was not authorised, and that the price...

8. FT v O Ltd [2024] NZDT 693 (20 August 2024) [pdf, 132 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 693 APPLICANT FT RESPONDENT O Ltd The Tribunal orders: O Ltd is to pay FT $3,084.00 by 3 September 2024. Reasons: 1. Between July 2023 and May 2024, FT worked for O Ltd as a sales agent under an independent contract. She says she has not been paid her share of the commission due on the sale of [address]. 2. SI, the director of O Ltd...

9. LCRO 099/2016 IJ v KL (28 July 2017) [pdf, 225 KB]

   ...review are whether Mr KL settled the matter contrary to Mr IJ’s instructions and authority, whether he overcharged Mr IJ, and following settlement 2 whether he withheld from Mr IJ copies of correspondence and information on Mr KL’s fee as requested by Mr IJ. Complaint [5] Mr IJ lodged a complaint with the New Zealand Law Society Complaints Service on 9 December 2014. The substance of his complaint was that Mr KL: (a) Did not keep him informed or act in his interests....

10. [2008] NZEmpC AC 43A/08 James Denyer v Les Griffen Ltd [pdf, 19 KB]

    ...have indicated and order the sequestration of the defendant’s property. I expressed this as the final opportunity for the defendant to meet its statutory obligations. [2] On Tuesday 11 November 2008, a little before 4pm, the Court received a request for an adjournment of the hearing scheduled for 2.30pm this afternoon. The application was made by Mr Les Griffen on the basis that he had been waiting 9 months for major surgery and was to go into hospital on Thursday 13 or Friday...