CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 295 APPLICANT N Ltd RESPONDENT SH The Tribunal orders: 1. SH is to pay N Ltd $1,670.70 within 30 days of the date of this Order. SH’s counterclaim is dismissed. Reasons: 2. On Dec 2 2021, SH entered into a contract for services with N Ltd for the provision of a 32 cubic meter truck and two movers at $12...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 302 APPLICANT QS RESPONDENT DG The Tribunal orders: 1. The claim is dismissed. 2. OS is removed as an applicant party. Reasons: 1. The object of this dispute is a large seventy year old golden Elm tree that grew on a property that was owned by DG until May of this year when she sold her house. The tree...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 304 APPLICANT BL and DL RESPONDENT L Ltd RESPONDENT V Ltd The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons: 1. BL and DL purchased a [redacted] shade umbrella from L Ltd in November 2021 after they viewed the designs and fabric at L Ltd’s showroom. The umbrella was installed In January 2022,...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 77 APPLICANT EB RESPONDENT U Ltd The Tribunal orders: This order replaces the order determining this matter issued on 3 August 2022. Claim: EB’s claim for a declaration of non-liability is dismissed. Counterclaim: EB is to pay U Ltd $2,205.70 within 14 days. Reasons [1] EB engaged U Ltd, represented by TU (director) and...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2023] NZDT 684 APPLICANT D Ltd RESPONDENT KL The Tribunal orders: 1. The claim is dismissed. 2. D Ltd is to pay KL the total sum of $1500.00 on or before Tuesday 30 January 2024. Reasons: 1. KL’s car had been vandalised and in lieu of write off he had settled with his insurer and was restoring it. In April 2022 he engaged D Ltd (th...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2023] NZDT 718 APPLICANT TD RESPONDENT E Ltd The Tribunal orders: E Ltd is to pay TD $1,432.00 on or before 12 February 2024. Reasons: 1. TD had dental work done by E Ltd in October 2021. The work consisted of five fillings. TD says the work was not done with reasonable care and skill and was not fit for purpose. TD seeks an order th...
[2023] NZPSPLA 074 IN THE MATTER OF A complaint under s 74 of the Private Security Personnel and Private Investigators Act 2010 against FD HEARD virtually on 9 November 2023 APPEARANCES X FD [redacted] for [redacted] Group Ltd [redacted]for [redacted] DECISION [1] FD holds a Certificate of Approval (COA) in the classes of Crowd Controller, Property Guard and Personal Security Guard that is valid until 30 March 2026. He has held a COA ostensibly without i...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 345 APPLICANT IN RESPONDENT BI The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons 1. In October 2022 IN and BI decided to register and produce a dance performance for the [the festival], which was to take place in [redacted]. No formal agreement was made, rather they started the process together as co-choreograp...
CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2023] NZDT 139 APPLICANT DG RESPONDENT NQ The Tribunal orders: NQ is to pay DG $2,799.31 within 28 days. Reasons [1] DG claims from NQ the cost of electrical work that was done in order to rectify faulty work done by NQ. NQ denies liability. [2] DG said that his hot water system had been performing poorly in his house. He had...
...Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 720 APPLICANT VI SECOND APPLICANT BB Ltd RESPONDENT KN, QN and BQ The Tribunal orders: The claim and counterclaim are both dismissed. Reasons: 1. In 2023 VI signed an Agreement to Lease a shop in [Suburb] from the Respondent, intending to run a nail and beauty salon from the shop. The arrangement was short lived, and VI did not actually set up her salon or trade from the shop. The Resp...