12990 items matching your search terms
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 299 APPLICANT CU RESPONDENT MQ The Tribunal orders: Claim MQ is to pay CU $115.00 within 28 days. Counterclaim The counterclaim is dismissed. Reasons [1] CU sold a number of items on [platform], and inadvertently provided MQ’s bank account number to buyers. The buyers paid a total of $ 474.50 into MQ’s account. A...
...of $2000 is appropriate in view of the deliberateness of the actions and the lack of consent. 22. I make no award against UT as she did not trespass on to DS’s lane or damage any of her property. 23. I am unable to award the $180 costs claimed by DS under the Disputes Tribunal Act. 24. The amount awarded above is made up as follows: Value of tree $4,000.00 Arborist costs 1,000.00 Fence panels 160.00 CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 4 of 5 Clematis 60.00 Loss of ameni...
...able to increase the half hourly rates for hearings and meeting time, except for parole, Court of Appeal and Supreme Court, which will be included in the 2018 fee schedules. Other matters: a. fees available when cases are reassigned – you requested that both providers be able to claim all the fees in a schedule b. fees for co-counsel – you requested that counsel and co-counsel be able to claim all the same fees in a schedule, particularly in cases where there are co-accused...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 2 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2023] NZDT 683 APPLICANT Q Ltd RESPONDENT U Ltd SECOND RESPONDENT R Ltd The Tribunal orders: The applicant did not appear to present the claim and the claim is struck out for lack of jurisdiction. Reasons 1. Q Ltd claim that they suffered losses in the course of their application process to U Ltd and R Ltd for [The Accreditat...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2023] NZDT 668 APPLICANT BV RESPONDENT JU The Tribunal orders: The Applicant’s claim is dismissed. Reasons: 1. JU did not attend the hearing and did not provide any defence to the claim. The absence of a party does not prevent the hearing from proceeding. Section 42 of the Disputes Tribunal Act provides that where the case...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 2 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 674 APPLICANT IQ Limited RESPONDENT D Limited THIRD OR SUBSEQUENT RESPONDENT AG The Tribunal orders: D Limited and AG, jointly and severally, are to pay the sum of $3,863.93 to IQ Limited on or before Thursday 19 September 2024. Reasons: 1. On 15 December 2022, AG requested plumbing services from IQ Limited for [a Pr
Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 254 APPLICANT EM RESPONDENT JJ The Tribunal orders: 1. The Respondent shall pay the Applicant $11,000.00 by 8 June 2023. 2. The Respondent shall collect the vehicle from the Applicant by arrangement, within 5 working after payment has been made in full. If the vehicle is not collected in that time, the Applicant may dispose of the...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 222 APPLICANT NC and DC RESPONDENT T Ltd SECOND RESPONDENT HG The Tribunal orders: 1. T Ltd is to pay NC and DC $3100.25 on or before 5pm on 19 June 2023. 2. HG is struck off this claim. Reasons 1. The first hearing was adjourned. After that hearing, T Ltd and HG contacted the Tribunal and request
...admissibility hearing Activity A B C Tasks covered by Fixed Fee Pre-trial admissibility hearing $225 For: Taking instructions, attending the client Receiving and reviewing disclosure Identifying legal and factual issues Preparing application Liaising with other agencies Attending hearing/s Receiving decision Any agent fees Reporting to client. Schedules A–J — July 2013 3 Activity A B C Tasks covered by Fixed Fee Pre...
...AUCKLAND I TE KŌTI TAKE MAHI O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU [2023] NZEmpC 218 EMPC 25/2023 EMPC 111/2023 IN THE MATTER OF challenges to determinations of the Employment Relations Authority AND IN THE MATTER OF an application for costs BETWEEN CARRINGTON RESORT JADE LP Plaintiff AND PAULA KNIGHT Defendant Hearing: On the papers Appearances: W Tan, agent for plaintiff R Mark, counsel for defendant Judgment:...