Search Results

1. Heng v Yap [2014] NZIACDT 65 (28 May 2014) [pdf, 175 KB]

   ...had not received accurate advice at the outset. [12] The Statement of Complaint provided particulars of the grounds of complaint: [12.1] The matters potentially founding negligence or incompetence are: [12.1.1] The complainant, before giving informed instructions, needed accurate advice as to his prospects of success in the EOI pool. Whether he could reasonably expect to migrate to New Zealand or not would turn on that information. [12.1.2] The advice he received was wrong and, as a...

2. BL v DQ [2020] NZDT 1303 (12 November 2020) [pdf, 189 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 28 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 Rehearing Out o...

3. Kaufusi v Tangilanu [2014] NZIACDT 70 (19 June 2014) [pdf, 90 KB]

   ...assistance to implement his decisions. [2] The grounds of complaint are in essence that the adviser failed to: [2.1] Complete the compulsory steps for client engagement; specifically she failed to provide advice on the options available and obtain informed instructions; [2.2] Carry out the work she agreed to perform; and [2.3] In addition, she failed to communicate with her client during the process. [3] The adviser has not challenged the Statement of Complaint. Accordingly, the Tri...

4. EU v O Ltd [2023] NZDT 308 (8 August 2023) [pdf, 131 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 6 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 308 APPLICANT EU RESPONDENT O Ltd The Tribunal orders: O Ltd is to pay EU the total sum of $1680.00 on or before Tuesday 29 August 2023. Reasons: 1. By written contract dated 22 August 2019, EU was engaged by O Ltd as head coach. She was required to obtain a work visa to perform her duties under the con...

5. Saul v Ramos [2014] NZIACDT 48 (09 April 2014) [pdf, 130 KB]

   ...was significantly later than the date contemplated as the extent of the permitted stay in New Zealand. [3] The complainant had some difficulties and the adviser sought a new visa just before his first visa expired. When it expired, she made further applications, under a provision allowing persons with an expired visa to seek discretionary relief. [4] The complainant says the adviser led him to believe his visa did not expire until the later of the two dates in the visa sticker; in fact,...

6. [2023] NZEnvC 258 Kaiuma Farm Limited v Queenstown Lakes District Council [pdf, 236 KB]

   KAIUMA FARM LTD v MARBERRY ESTATE LTD & ORS – COST DECISION IN THE ENVIRONMENT COURT AT CHRISTCHURCH I TE KŌTI TAIAO O AOTEAROA KI ŌTAUTAHI Decision No. [2023] NZEnvC 258 IN THE MATTER of the Resource Management Act 1991 AND an application for interim enforcement orders under s320 of the Act BETWEEN KAIUMA FARM LIMITED (ENV-2021-CHC-121) Applicant AND MARBERRY ESTATE LIMITED First Respondent AND M & R FORESTLAND MANAGEMENT LIMITED Second Respondent AND...

7. Midlane v Woodberg [2013] NZIACDT 31 (27 May 2013) [pdf, 152 KB]

   ...potential issues relating to: [6.1] The client engagement process, [6.2] The possible involvement of an unlicensed person giving immigration advice, [6.3] Contacting Mr Midlane’s client direct in breach of instructions, [6.4] Withdrawing an application without instructions, [6.5] Timeliness of service delivery, and [6.6] Using money paid to meet Immigration New Zealand’s costs for another purpose. [7] Counsel for Ms Woodberg obtained both Ms Woodberg and Mr Midlane’s files,...

8. WH v SS Ltd [2019] NZDT 1459 (26 March 2019) [pdf, 218 KB]

   ...to relieve the innkeeper from all responsibility. 14. I have not been satisfied that this defence applies. WH’s room was able to be accessed by hotel housekeeping staff during her stay. I was told that a cleaning service would have been performed on two occasions during WH’s stay and then a final clean and service after WH departed the hotel. 15. WH did not inform hotel staff not to enter the room. She did not assume exclusive use of the room so as to show an intention to r...

9. NP v LO & Ors [2024] NZDT 687 (26 August 2024) [pdf, 243 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 5 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 686 APPLICANT NP RESPONDENT LO SECOND RESPONDENT OC THIRD RESPONDENT A Ltd The Tribunal orders: 1. A Ltd is to pay NP the sum of $506.00 on or before 16 September 2024. 2. The claims against LO and OC are dismissed. Reasons: 1. NP signed a commercial lease for premises ([the leased room]) at [a Building] i...

10. Eppanapally v Zhou [2014] NZIACDT 118 (28 November 2014) [pdf, 229 KB]

    ...after she started working in the practice. She was the sole licence holder in the practice at that time. She wrote a submission in response to a query from Immigration New Zealand. However, Immigration New Zealand was not satisfied with the response, requested more information and provided a deadline for the reply. Ms Zhou rang Mr Eppanapally’s agent (though he disputes the person was authorised) and requested the particulars. [3] Further than that, Ms Zhou did not follow up, and Immig...