CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 142 APPLICANT BI APPLICANT SI RESPONDENT BA The Tribunal orders: The Applicant’s claim is not proven and therefore dismissed. Reasons: 1. The Applicants are claiming $21,030.00 which they say is the amount that they paid to the Respondent in three cash payments (21 July 2015- $12,000.00, 27 J...
...APPLICANT YT RESPONDENT CU Limited The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons: 1. CU Limited (the manager) was the property manager for a rental property in [Suburb] purchased by YT (the landlord) in May 2016. In June 2023, the landlord decided to sell the property and the tenants were given 90 days’ notice to vacate. On 15 September, after the exit inspection, the manager advised the landlord that the property would require a deep clean due to smoke damage...
...advances both assertions about where he got the information, Mr Wintour’s narrative, for almost seven years after the events, advanced only the Police Officer version. His narrative neither suggested nor admitted any other source until October 2023. The Standards Committee disputes that Mr Wintour was visited by Police Officers on 5 December but, even if that visit occurred, disputes that officers could have then accessed the conviction list because of the absence of an automatic...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 5 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 17 APPLICANT CA RESPONDENT DX SECOND RESPONDENT OX APPLICANT'S INSURER CJ Ltd The Tribunal orders: DX and OX are to pay to CA the sum of $1,015.15 on or before 15 March 2023. Reasons: 1. CA was the owner of a cat named Oliver. 2. DX and OX were the owners of a dog named Budd...
...2013, NS Ltd supplied a coffee machine to NI under the terms of a written supply agreement. NI owned HD in [town]. 3. In July 2022, CQ purchased the ND business from NS Ltd. CQ Ltd changed its name to ND Ltd. 4. In December 2022 / January 2023 DD purchased HD from NI. 5. ND Ltd became aware of the sale of HD, and they contacted DD with a view to entering into a supply agreement. ND Ltd sent DD a draft supply agreement, but he did not sign and return it. 6. On 3 May 2023,...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 5 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2023] NZDT 547 APPLICANT XU RESPONDENT NP SECOND RESPONDENT HP THIRD OR SUBSEQUENT RESPONDENT DH Ltd The Tribunal orders: 1. HP and DH Ltd are to deliver to XU the six gates and support poles previously removed by HP or DH Ltd from a barn at the racecourse. 2. These are to be delivered on or before 20 October 202...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 5 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2023] NZDT 688 APPLICANT AA RESPONDENT N Ltd The Tribunal orders: N Ltd is to pay $15,000.00 to AA on or before 3 February 2024. Reasons 1. AA purchased a new townhouse off the plans at the [neighbourhood], developed and sold by N Ltd (‘N LTD’). The sale and purchase agreement was signed on 15 October 2021 and some variations were a...
E.64 SOI (2023) Te Tāhū o te Ture Statement of Intent 2023-2027 ISSN 1175-8414 (PRINT) | ISSN 1178-6914 (ONLINE) 2023 © Crown Copyright This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 New Zealand licence. You are free to copy, distribute and adapt the work, as long as you attribute the work to the Ministry of Justice and follow any other licence terms. To see a copy of this licence, visit creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 Presented to the House of Representative...
...her travel requirements is a reviewable decision; and whether the Corporation unreasonably delayed in issuing decisions on her applications for funding for additional taxi journeys. The Reviewer modified the Corporation’s decision of 2 October 2023 on the level of funding for taxi transport/service issues, by increasing the destinations to which the appellant could travel. Background [2] On 5 March 2015, the appellant (aged 43) was involved in a motor vehicle accident, in w...
471 Aotea MB 9 McDonell v Burgess – Te Rongoroa Papakainga Māori Reservation (2023) 471 Aotea MB 9 (471 AOT 9) I TE KOOTI WHENUA MĀORI O AOTEAROA I TE ROHE O AOTEA In the Māori Land Court of New Zealand Aotea District A20230004538 WĀHANGA Under Section 239 and 338(7), Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993 MŌ TE TAKE In the matter of Te Rongoroa Papakainga Māori Reservation I WAENGA I A Between JEANETTE MCDONELL, TUNISCIA CLARKSON, PILA...