Search Results

1. GM v Q Ltd [2024] NZDT 722 (22 August 2024) [pdf, 98 KB]

   ...Ltd said that their business was not open to the public to walk in and it was only office staff that worked there and the only people that would go there were those with appointments. The google street view was referred to. The image is dated March 2023, 12 months prior to the incident. The image implies that N Ltd is open to the public in that they rent houses, do casual lettings and appears to have a reception area. There is also a N Ltd sandwich board on the street outside informing p...

2. LU v CW [2024] NZDT 734 (21 September 2024) [pdf, 130 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 734 APPLICANT LU RESPONDENT CW The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons: 1. In late December 2023 LU purchased a [Car] for $12,000.00 from CW. LU says that while initially being satisfied with the vehicle, it began overheating and was in such poor condition he was unable to drive it home from [City 1] to [City 2]. 2....

3. Hunter v Accident Compensation Corporation (Leave to Appeal to High Court) [2025] NZACC 97 (13 June 2025) [pdf, 170 KB]

   ...District Court, section 151(3)(a) of the Accident Compensation Act 2001 (the Act) required him to file a notice of appeal against the Reviewer’s decision within 28 days after a copy of the decision was provided to him. That date was 17 January 2023. [3] In the event, Mr Hunter did not file a notice of appeal until 22 January 2025. [4] Judge Spiller needed to decide whether to exercise the Court’s discretion and allow a longer time for the filing of the notice of appeal....

4. BT v HT [2024] NZDT 353 (7 May 2024) [pdf, 138 KB]

   ...DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 353 APPLICANT BT RESPONDENT HT SECOND RESPONDENT K Ltd The Tribunal orders: HT is to pay the sum of $12,037.00 to BT on or before Tuesday 28 May 2024. Reasons: 1. On 1 May 2023, the applicant, who is a taxi driver, dropped off a passenger in a wheelchair to the [temple] at [address]. He parked in a designated loading zone, and left the hoist open while he escorted the passenger to the front entrance. When he...

5. M Ltd v Q Inc [2024] NZDT 743 (28 November 2024) [pdf, 196 KB]

   ...Page 1 of 3 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 743 APPLICANT M Ltd RESPONDENT Q Inc The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons: 1) On 1 September 2023 the applicant entered into a sponsorship agreement with the respondent. The sponsorship agreement was to the effect that the applicant would pay the respondent $335.42 per month. The total value of the sponsorship was $3,500.00, plus GST. Th...

6. TN v A Ltd [2024] NZDT 752 (1 October 2024) [pdf, 113 KB]

   ...therefore I have decided to proceed to consider the claim in its absence. Background [3] The applicant disputes charges and raises concerns regarding the quality of service provided by the respondent A Ltd, her broadband provider since 27 September 2023. Since commencing service with A Ltd, the applicant submits she has experienced significant issues with the broadband speed. The applicant contracted for high-speed fibre advertised at 878Mbps download and 866Mbps upload speeds. The...

7. LL v KN [2024] NZDT 369 (27 June 2024) [pdf, 173 KB]

   ...ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 369 APPLICANT LL RESPONDENT KN The Tribunal orders: KN is to pay LL $560.00 on or before 18 July 2024. Reasons 1. LL entered into a flatmate agreement with KN from September 2023 to May 2024. After the contract ended KN refused to refund LL’s bond because of concerns about damage to the house. 2. LL claims a refund of her bond of $640.00, plus the filing fee of $45.00. As discussed at the hearing the Tribunal...

8. KN v D Ltd [2024] NZDT 371 (23 May 2024) [pdf, 170 KB]

   ...ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 371 APPLICANT KN RESPONDENT D Ltd The Tribunal orders: D Ltd is to pay KN $300.00 on or before 28 June 2024. Reasons: 1. KN took his [mobile phone] to D Ltd for repair in November 2023. The phone was not accepting charge. D Ltd said they would need to send the phone to [City 1] to be repaired and KN agreed to this. In February 2024 D Ltd told KN that they could no longer get hold of the company in [City 1]. D Ltd said th...

9. MG v L Ltd [2024] NZDT 548 (23 July 2024) [pdf, 96 KB]

   ...between MG and the tenancy manager for L Ltd (TH). In the emails TH talks about payment having to be paid to the landlord (being the owner of the neighbouring property from whom L Ltd had a headlease). For example, TH says in an email dated 13 October 2023: CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 2 of 3 I have spoken to our accounts team and as you are not a payee in the system this needs to go to our owner for payment. I have emailed him the details and asked him to send an invoice so we can p...

10. EQ & KQ v S Ltd [2024] NZDT 606 (22 July 2024) [pdf, 114 KB]

    ...work and legal fees? Was the califont present at the date of settlement? 5. The parties agree that the califont was installed when the house was built but has been removed at some point. 6. KQ and EQ visited the property on 2 November 2023, and took photos as part of their final inspection, settlement was 4 November. KQ and EQ claim that when they moved in, they realised there was nothing to connect their gas bottles to, and the califont had been removed from the wall. They...