From 3 June 2025 the Employment Court will start publishing its judgments from 24 hours after the delivery date, or the next business day, unless otherwise directed by a judge. Decisions of public interest may be published earlier, as directed by a judge.

You can search by selecting a jurisdiction, a keyword (for example a name) or browse by year.

Some jurisdictions only publish a selection of decisions. Identifying details may be removed.

Search results

3881 items matching your search terms

  1. [2025] NZEmpC 205 Open Country Dairy Limited v Stewart [PDF, 172 KB]

    [2025] NZEmpC 205 Open Country Dairy Limited v Stewart (Judgment of Judge M S King, 12 September 2025) FREEZING ORDER - VARIATION – APPLICATION TO DISCHARGE FREEZING ORDERS – evidence of fraud by respondent – real risk of dissipation of assets remains – respondent not to be prohibited from dealing with the assets for the purposes of ordinary living expenses – application to discharge freezing order declined – interests of justice favour variation- freezing order varied.  

  2. [2025] NZEmpC 198 Rural Practice Ltd and Abdul Jabbar v A Labour Inspector [PDF, 234 KB]

    [2025] NZEmpC 198 Rural Practice Ltd and Abdul Jabbar v A Labour Inspector (Judgment of Judge Holden, 10 September 2025) NON-DE NOVO CHALLENGE – challenge to penalties determination – issues about recusal of Authority member are procedural – barred by s 179(5) Employment Relations Act – concern to be dealt with by way of a de novo challenge to substantive determination – quantum ordered appropriate – setting penalties is an inexact science – breaches sufficiently serious to warrant 85 per cent starting point – breaches were multiple, systematic, intentional and involved deception – insufficient evidence of financial incapacity – support and kindness to employees is not a mitigating factor – late and partial performance deserves little credit – penalties not out of proportion – quantum sits in the middle by relative comparison to other cases – challenge dismissed

  3. [2025] NZEmpC 201 Pilgrim Ors v Attorney-General Ors [PDF, 202 KB]

    [2025] NZEmpC 201 Pilgrim & Ors v Attorney-General & Ors (Costs Judgment (No 2) of Chief Judge Inglis, 10 September 2025) APPLICATION FOR DISBURSEMENTS – questionable whether High Court Rules apply in determining disbursements – expenses may be broader than disbursements – application determined under conventional High Court Rules principles - investigator’s work partially overlapped with work ordinarily done by a lawyer – non-legal support provided by investigator to witnesses was reasonably necessary for the conduct of the proceeding – investigator expenses partially awarded – accountant did not give evidence in Court but provided useful material for other expert accountant – accountant invoice awarded – counsel accommodation could only cover hearing days and bookends

  4. [2025] NZEmpC 193 Black Lion Holdings Ltd v Peterson [PDF, 178 KB]

    [2025] NZEmpC 193 Black Lion Holdings Ltd v Peterson (judgment of Judge JC Holden, 29 August 2025) APPLICATION FOR STAY – SECURITY FOR COSTS – evidence of plaintiff’s inability to pay if unsuccessful – application for stay not required to protect challenge – defendant entitled to fruits of success – application for stay of proceedings declined - security for costs ordered – challenge to determination stayed until security for costs is paid.

  5. [2025] NZEmpC 191 Cunningham v healthAlliance NZ Limited [PDF, 209 KB]

    [2025] NZEmpC 191 Cunningham v healthAlliance NZ Limited (Interlocutory Judgment (No 2) of Judge M S King, 29 August 2025)  APPLICATION FOR WITNESS TO APPEAR VIA AVL – application opposed – factual issues uncontentious – evidence brief and unlikely to give rise to credibility issues – court has the ability to determine credibility and reliability - consent of parties not determinative – application to appear via AVL granted – APPLICATION FOR SEVERANCE OF PROCEEDINGS – right to natural justice unaffected by severance – partial hearing would be artificial and inefficient use of resources – application for severance appears motivated by avoiding compliance – application denied.

  6. [2025] NZEmpC 189 Tōpūtanga Tapuhi Kaitiaki o Aotearoa New Zealand Nurses Organisation Inc v Health New Zealand [PDF, 240 KB]

    [2025] NZEmpC 189 Tōpūtanga Tapuhi Kaitiaki o Aotearoa New Zealand Nurses Organisation Inc v Health New Zealand (judgment of Judge Holden 28 August 2025) APPLICATION FOR AN INTERIM INJUNCTION – union claims pay deduction notice/s for partial strike were unlawful – section 95B Employment Relations Act – arguable case of non-compliance – balance of convenience finely balanced but favours union– wage deductions for workers in the interim more impactful than recovery difficulties for employer – total sum relatively modest for enterprise of employer’s size – overall justice does not displace balance of convenience – application granted

  7. [2025] NZEmpC 187 Santamaria v Television New Zealand Ltd [PDF, 206 KB]

    [2025] NZEmpC 187 Santamaria v Television New Zealand Ltd (Interlocutory Judgment of Judge KG Smith, 27 August 2025) APPLICATION TO CONSOLIDATE PROCEEDINGS – Authority addressed preliminary jurisdiction question – issues not sufficiently discrete from substantive proceeding – same parties and same factual matrix – meaning of record of settlement essential to both claims – risk of issue estoppel – separation unlikely to shorten proceedings

  8. [2025] NZEmpC 186 Menzies v Corrigan [PDF, 309 KB]

    [2025] NZEmpC 186 Menzies v Corrigan (Costs judgment (No 2) of Judge Beck, 22 August 2025) APPLICATION FOR COSTS AGAINST NON-PARTY REPRESENTATIVE– APPLICATION FOR JOINDER –application to join plaintiff’s representative as party to proceedings for the purposes of costs – application for non-party discovery against defendant’s former lawyer was an extraordinary feature of the litigation – compensation for costs for non-party discovery conventional – advocates conduct directly contributed to costs incurred – costs awarded - CONDUCT OF REPRESENTATIVES – the conduct of representatives not beyond scrutiny of the Court– representatives may be personally liable for costs.

  9. [2025] NZEmpC 182 Open Country Dairy Limited v Stewart [PDF, 203 KB]

    [2025] NZEmpC 182 Open Country Dairy Limited v Stewart (Judgment of Judge M S King, 19 August 2025) FREEZING ORDERS – freezing orders applied for on urgent and without notice basis - arguable case for applicant - risk of dissipation of assets due to conduct of respondent and Authority determination – balance of convenience and interests of justice favours applicant – application granted with condition. APPLICATION FOR NON-PUBLICATION ORDERS – interim non-publication orders made by consent in the Authority - disclosure would have adverse consequences on applicant and respondent – application granted.

  10. 2025] NZEmpC 183 Legal Hub Ltd v Singh [PDF, 207 KB]

    [2025] NZEmpC 183 Legal Hub Ltd v Singh  (Judgment of Judge Smith, 19 August 2025) APPLICATION FOR DISCLOSURE BEFORE PROCEEDINGS COMMENCE – disclosure of bank statements sought – not required to provide adequate description of employment relationship problem – statement of problem in Authority requires less precision than High Court pleadings – applicant is rather searching for evidence to support their claim – Authority has sufficient investigative powers and can call for evidence as appropriate