.nz Dispute Resolution Scheme – Annual Report release 

Speed as a baseline

In today’s online digital environment, .nz domain names are valuable, active, commercial assets.  

When disputes arise, resolution needs to move at the pace of commerce — not the pace of traditional legal processes. Businesses need certainty quickly. 

This report highlights how binding outcomes can be reached in a fraction of the time typically associated with Court proceedings.  

On average, expert determination under the scheme results in a decision within 6 weeks from start to finish. In most cases, the .nz domain name is transferred to the claimant. 

Mediations are typically completed within two weeks and allow for an agreed outcome. 

While mediation needs both parties to agree to participate, expert determination provides a binding outcome regardless of whether the other party participates. 

“Domain names are often critical business assets, so when disputes arise it’s important that parties have access to processes that are timely, practical and fit for purpose. The Scheme is designed to provide accessible pathways to resolution, within a commercially realistic time frame.” Barbara Pearse, Domain Name Commissioner 

The scheme is also accessible and cost-effective: mediation is free to the parties, funded by the Domain Name Commission. For expert determination, the claimant pays the fixed fee (currently $2,000 plus GST). 

Accessibility is further supported by culturally responsive approaches, ensuring that processes are not only efficient and cost-effective but also appropriate to the environment in which disputes arise. 

The 2025/26 Annual Report demonstrates that the scheme performed strongly over the financial year, providing certainty to parties quickly so that business can continue. 

The report also includes interesting case studies that provide insights into the types of issues that can be addressed through the scheme. 

Read the full Annual Report → https://dnc.org.nz/assets/DocumentLibrary/NZDRC-.nz-Dispute-Resolution-Scheme-report-2025-26.pdf 

Other resources you might like

If you found this article helpful and are interested in learning more, there is a wealth of other resources available on our website. We have a wide array of articles and guides on a variety of topics, each designed to provide you with a deeper understanding of the subject matter. We encourage you to explore these resources and deepen your knowledge.

GROCERY INDUSTRY DISPUTE RESOLUTION SCHEME DELIVERED BY THE NEW ZEALAND DISPUTE RESOLUTION CENTRE GOES LIVE 

Minister Andrew Bayly, the Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs, announced yesterday that he has approved the rules of the Grocery Industry Dispute Resolution Scheme. The scheme is now in force. The New Zealand Dispute Resolution Centre (NZDRC) is proud to have been selected to provide this scheme for the grocery industry, and to now have it available for use.
Aerial view of a cargo ship docked at a port. The ship is loaded with multicolored shipping containers. Three large green cranes are positioned alongside the ship, with their shadows cast on the deck and water. The port area has rows of containers.

Supreme Court of New South Wales finds force majeure clause offered no protection for loss and damage to goods in transit

In Woolworths Group Ltd v Twentieth Super Pace Nominees Pty Ltd [2021] NSWSC 344, the Supreme Court of New South Wales applied a narrow interpretation to the meaning and effect of a force majeure clause, finding that it did not override other clauses in the contract, or alter the overall allocation of risk intended by the parties.
A woman with curly hair and glasses, dressed in a turquoise top, holds folders against her chest with one hand while resting her other arm on her forehead. She stands in front of a plain off-white wall, appearing tired or stressed.

Unfair terms in consumer contracts – important changes to the Fair Trading Act 1986

A 2018 Ministry of Business, Innovation & Employment (MBIE) survey of small businesses found that 45 per cent of participants considered that they had been offered unfair contract terms in the last year, and 47 per cent considered that they had otherwise been treated unfairly.[1]

Get in touch

Contact our team today to see how we can help

Contact us

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.