13138 items matching your search terms
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 5 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2020] NZDT 1324 APPLICANT TT RESPONDENT KU The Tribunal orders: 1. KU is to pay to TT the sum of $5,320.00 on or before 30 September 2020. 2. TT may keep or sell the pony “A” as she sees fit. Reasons 1. In June 2019, Ms T purchased a four year old pony “A” from Ms U for $6,500.00. The pony was purchased for her...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 629 APPLICANT QI JOINT RESPONDENTS KI L Ltd The Tribunal orders: KI and L are to pay $2,645.00 to QI on or before Thursday 1 August 2024. Reasons: 1. In March and July 2019, L Ltd carried out engineering consulting work for QI which included issuing PS1’s and a PS4. KI is the company director for L Ltd. QI paid $1,725...
...ROONEY EARTHMOVING LTD V MCTAGUE AND ANOR CHCH CC 7/07 11 May 2007 IN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT CHRISTCHURCH CC 7/07 CRC 28/06 IN THE MATTER OF an application for leave to extend time to challenge BETWEEN ROONEY EARTHMOVING LIMITED Applicant AND KELVIN DOUGLAS MCTAGUE, CLARENCE WHITING AND KERRY WAYNE BARTLETT Respondents Hearing: On papers filed on 18 December 2006, 16 and 30 January, 16 February, and 2, 19 and 27 March 2007 Judgment: 11 May 2007 J...
...adviser, lawyer or included in certain other specific categories of persons. There are some limited exceptions to the general principle, but the restriction applies everywhere in the world. [3] The regime requires licensed immigration advisers to perform the services personally. They are different from other professionals who can usually allow non-qualified staff to provide many services under the supervision of a qualified professional. [4] Unfortunately, there have been a series...
...AUCKLAND [2017] NZEmpC 25 [9 March 2017] IN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT AUCKLAND [2017] NZEmpC 25 EMPC 331/2016 IN THE MATTER OF a challenge to a determination of the Employment Relations Authority AND IN THE MATTER of an application for leave to extend time to comply with directions BETWEEN NEELAM AHUJA, CHIRAG AHUJA AND RHYTHM AHUJA (RE KHOOBSURAT LIMITED) (IN LIQUIDATION) Plaintiffs AND NAARI COLLECTION LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION) AN...
1 IN THE HUMAN RIGHTS REVIEW TRIBUNAL [2012] NZHRRT 17 Reference No. HRRT 026/2010 IN THE MATTER OF A CLAIM UNDER THE PRIVACY ACT 1993 BETWEEN GORDON HENRY HOLMES PLAINTIFF AND COMMISSIONER OF POLICE DEFENDANT AT DUNEDIN BEFORE: Mr RPG Haines QC, Chairperson Ms W Gilchrist, Member Ms S Scott, Member REPRESENTATION: Mr Holmes in person Ms A Russell and Mr R Moran for Defendant DATE OF HEARING: 30 November 2011 and 1 Dece...
...CORPORATION Respondent Hearing: 16 December 2021 Held at: Auckland/Tāmaki Makaurau Appearances: B Hinchcliff for the appellant F Becroft for the respondent Judgment: 13 January 2022 RESERVED JUDGMENT OF JUDGE P R SPILLER [Claim for weekly entitlements - s 67, Accident Compensation Act 2001] Introduction [1] This is an appeal from the decision of a Reviewer dated 11 November 2020. The Reviewer dismissed an application for review of the Corporation’s decis...
...immigration adviser. [2] They had applied personally for visas and received a letter from Immigration New Zealand raising issues of concern. [3] They sought Mr Hakaoro’s assistance and say they paid him fees of $50, $200, and $500. [4] They claim Mr Hakaoro did not take the steps required to initiate a professional relationship, failed to give the appropriate advice, misrepresented what work he was doing, and made unprofessional threats. [5] Mr Hakaoro says he was not working for...
...its failure to pay monies owed to Mr Michael Dunlop. Subsequently, Mr Parbhu, the plaintiff’s managing director and representative in the proceedings, sought leave to challenge the whole of the determination by way of a hearing de novo. The application was not opposed and leave was granted accordingly. The scope of the challenge was confirmed in a minute issued to the parties on 20 March 2012. [2] By way of background, Mr Dunlop was employed by the plaintiff as a salesperso...
...ONE PERSON 14. POWER TO ISSUE A SUMMONS DETERMINATION 15. ORDER OF DETERMINATION AND REQUESTS FOR PRIORITY 16. ENQUIRIES ABOUT DELIVERY OF DECISION 17. DECISIONS AFTER THE DECISION 18. RETURN OF DOCUMENTS 19. APPEAL TO HIGH COURT AND APPLICATIONS FOR JUDICAL REVIEW 2 PREAMBLE This Practice Note is issued pursuant to section 220(2)(a) of the Immigration Act 2009 (“the Act”). It is effective for all appeals relating to residence class visas (”residence ap...