12972 items matching your search terms
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 459 APPLICANT LR RESPONDENT U Ltd The Tribunal orders: 1. U Ltd is to pay $2,304.34 to LR on or before 9 July 2024. 2. This order is to be emailed and posted to the parties. Reasons: 3. The matter has previously been adjourned as SE, U Ltd said he had not received Notice of the Hearing. U Ltd’s contact details were updated in...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 680 APPLICANT HI RESPONDENT UL The Tribunal orders: UL is to pay HI $10,575.00 within 28 days. UL did not appear at the hearing. Reasons [1] HI purchased a house in [Suburb] from UL. HI claims that some items that should have been included with the sale had been removed when he took possession of the house, and he seeks an order for comp...
LCRO 89/2017 CONCERNING an application for review pursuant to section 193 of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 AND CONCERNING a determination of the [Area] Standards Committee BETWEEN FZ Applicant AND LS Respondent The names and identifying details of the parties in this decision have been changed. DECISION Introduction [1] Mr FZ has applied for a review of a decision by the [Area] Standards Committee to take no further action in...
...engagement approach is appropriate, but it is fundamental that there is also consultation targeted at specific mana whenua groups. Neither has occurred to date in a satisfactory manner.10 An effective relationship with the Applicant should have been formed ahead of lodging the applications and that ‘timely, meaningful and effective engagement’ should have already occurred to the point where the Applicant was aware of what the cultural values are and what the impacts of the...
...complies with each of the relevant provisions of the building code. [(2A) omitted (3) Except where a code compliance certificate has already been provided pursuant to subsection (2) of this section, the territorial authority shall issue to the applicant in the prescribed form, on payment of any charge fixed by the territorial authority, a code compliance certificate, if it is satisfied on reasonable grounds that— (a) The building work to which the certificate relates complies with t...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 6 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2023] NZDT 555 APPLICANT L Foundation RESPONDENT OS The Tribunal orders: 1. OS is to deliver the dog HJ to EV (as representative of the L Foundation), or to make HJ reasonably available for EV to collect, by no later than 1 June 2023. 2. OS is to pay L Foundation $7,235.00 by 1 June 2023. Reasons 1. The adjournment order dated 9 Fe...
...within Mr Pender’s group. Mr Pender viewed this as a vacancy to which he should be appointed. The company did not view things in this way. Mr Pender surmised that this was because he was pursuing a personal grievance. The April 2018 issue formed the basis for a second claim of unjustifiable disadvantage. [4] The Authority upheld Mr Pender’s claim, awarded him $800 by way of reimbursement for lost wages and $12,500 compensation under s 123(1)(c)(i) of the Employment Relations...
...of one proceeding is likely to have a material effect on the other. 5 See Spackman v Martin [2021] NZHC 157. 6 The causes of action are not referred to in the High Court decision, but Mr Spackman disclosed them in a separate affidavit which formed part of a discontinued application to this Court seeking to be joined as a party to the proceeding. 7 By reference to the Employment Relations Act 2000, ss 189(1) and 221(d); and see Transpacific All Brite Ltd v Sanko [2012] NZEmpC 7....
...2014 (the Code). The Registrar of Immigration Advisers (the Registrar), the head of the Authority, has referred the complaint to the Tribunal. The most serious allegation is that Ms Penty relied on unlicensed persons in the Philippines to perform immigration services for clients, contrary to the Act. [3] An almost identical complaint against Mr Cleland has already been upheld by the Tribunal and he was found to have breached numerous provisions of the Code. While formally denyi...
...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...