Employment Court of New Zealand Te Kōti Take Mahi o Aotearoa

[2026] NZEmpC 6 FMV v TZB (Interlocutory judgment of Judge JC Holden, 21 January 2026) APPLICATION TO SET ASIDE WITNESS SUMMONS – summons calling witnesses that lack knowledge or used to promote a collateral process are oppressive – proposed witnesses have little to no direct knowledge of relevant matters – evidence sought cuts across Human Rights Review Tribunal decision about sufficiency of responses to Privacy Act requests – application granted.

[2026] NZEmpC 4  CG v Calendar Girls NZ Ltd (Interlocutory (No 2) Judgment of Chief Judge Inglis, 20 January 2026) APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO WITHDRAW AS COUNSEL AND SOLICITOR – inherent powers exist to allow withdrawal – adequate basis exists for withdrawal – application granted.

[2026] NZEmpC 2 E tū Inc v Rasier Operations BV (Interlocutory (No 4) Judgment of Chief Judge Inglis, 15 January 2026) APPLICATION FOR ACCESS TO COURT DOCUMENTS - evidence may be relevant to issue in Australian proceedings - evidence was given in open court - principle of open justice favours granting access - privacy issues do not outweigh open justice in the circumstances - application granted.

[2025] NZEmpC 284 Cunningham v healthAlliance NZ Ltd and healthAlliance NZ Ltd v Cunningham (Costs Judgment of Judge M S King, 22 December 2025) COSTS – GUIDELINE SCALE – scale costs awarded with adjustments – costs on costs awarded.

[2025] NZEmpC 281 A Labour Inspector of MBIE v Elements Therapeutic Massage Limited and ors (Interlocutory Judgment (No 2) of Judge M S King, 22 December 2025).  APPLICATION FOR STAY – substantive challenge appealed to the Court of Appeal and stayed by consent – parties do not consent to a stay on the issue of costs – leave to appeal being pursued in good faith – appeal raises issues of public interest – right of appeal will not be rendered nugatory by a stay – issue of costs may create degree of complexity – undesirable to treat substantive proceeding differently to costs determination – interests of justice and efficiency that costs be determined following appeal – costs stayed pending outcome of appeal process or further order of the Court – application granted.

[2025] NZEmpC 278 Yang v Te Whatu Ora - Health New Zealand (Judgment of Chief Judge Inglis, 19 December 2025) NON-DE NOVO CHALLENGE - UNJUSTIFIABLE DISMISSAL -  BREACH OF GOOD FAITH - employer breached good faith by failing to advise employee that her employment was under threat - insufficient evidence that the employer conspired to justify dismissal - Authority did not err in declining a penalty for breach of good faith - LOST WAGES - mitigation requires assessment of what could reasonably be expected in the particular circumstances - employee aimed for reinstatement, and was blind-sided by dismissal - lack of job searching was reasonable in the circumstances - Authority erred in finding that employee failed to mitigate - lost wages award increased to 3 months - COMPENSATION – Unclear whether Authority used bands or compared harm to previous cases – role of PRECEDENT in employment cases discussed - compensation award was appropriate in the circumstances - CONTRIBUTION - Authority erre…

[2025] NZEmpC 275 YFR v Reserve Bank of New Zealand/Te Pūtea Matua (Judgment of Judge K Beck, 18 December 2025) DE NOVO CHALLENGE – UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE – employee neurodivergent and suffered from mental health issues – employer proposed informal meeting without advising employee to bring a representative and misled as to purpose - employee offered paid leave until the end of a fixed term agreement or the option of a disciplinary process – employee became highly distressed– meeting could not be characterised as informal – employer was aware of the challenges and should have advised to bring a representative – outcome of the meeting was predetermined –  employers actions unjustified and resulted in disadvantage – evidence of the impact on employee’s mental health provided – REMEDIES – $15,000 awarded under s 123(1)(c) – reduced by 15 percent for contributory conduct – application for lost wages declined – no expectation of employment following the end of a fixed term agreement.

[2025] NZEmpC 274 Hussain v Auckland Transport (Judgment of Judge Helen Doyle, 17 December 2025) APPLICATION FOR INTERIM REINSTATEMENT - SERIOUS MISCONDUCT - parking officer summarily dismissed following complaints from security guards - low threshold met for serious question to be tried in relation to unjustifiable dismissal - significant delay in progressing application, mostly attributed to employee - lapse of 18 months impacts potential for successful reintegration - balance of convenience favours employer - overall justice requires application to be declined.

[2025] NZEmpC 272 Berryman v Fonterra Cooperative Group Limited (Judgment of Judge M S King, 12 December 2025) DE NOVO CHALLENGE – UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – HEALTH AND SAFETY – COVID–19 – employer implemented COVID-19 policy requiring either vaccination or rapid antigen testing (RAT) – employee terminated for refusing vaccine or daily RAT – employee alleged policy was unlawful and unreasonable –government COVID-19 regulations allowed employer to develop own assessment tool –the resulting policy was consistent with guidance and open to a fair and reasonable employer – policy was consistent with health and safety obligations – consultation process was fair and genuine – employee could not comply with health and safety policy and requirements of the role –  dismissal justified – UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE – BULLYING – employer responded to bullying allegations fairly and appropriately – no disadvantage established. UNLAWFUL DISCRIMINATION – no reasonable basis to conclude vaccination status i…

[2025] NZEmpC 271 - Jasmine Catering Limited v Wang (Costs Judgment of Judge M S King, 12 December 2025) COSTS – GUIDELINE SCALE – scale costs awarded with adjustments. 

[2025] NZEmpC 268 McDermott v Peninsula Group NZ Ltd (Judgment of Judge K G Smith, 10 December 2025)  EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE CHALLENGE – plaintiff wishes to file a de novo challenge to Authority’s costs determination – reason for disputing costs entirely connected with disagreement about correctness of substantive determination – application unnecessary and dismissed

[2025] NZEmpC 267 Soapi v Pick Hawke's Bay Inc (Consent Judgment of Judge KG Smith, 9 December 2025) Consent - Disbursements