Search Results

1. [2021] NZEmpC 45 Senate Investment Trust Through Crown Lease Trustees Ltdv Cooper [pdf, 248 KB]

   ...behavioural concerns in the text messages between 18 June and 1 July 2018. [23] The text messages that were exchanged during that period related to the possible purchase, by Mr Cooper from Mr Sowry, of a house that needed to be moved off a section and a message from Mr Cooper on 27 June 2018, checking whether his hours had been submitted. [24] The plaintiff’s records are of limited assistance; they show Mr Cooper’s “finish date” as Wednesday 28 June 2018. However, h...

2. [2023] NZEmpC 168 AJY v Chief Executive of the Department of Corrections [pdf, 545 KB]

   AJY v CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS [2023] NZEmpC 168 [3 October 2023] IN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND I TE KŌTI TAKE MAHI O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU [2023] NZEmpC 168 EMPC 167/2022 IN THE MATTER OF a challenge to a determination of the Employment Relations Authority BETWEEN AJY Plaintiff AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS Defendant EMPC 174/2022 IN THE MATTER

3. [2020] NZEmpC 174 Greetham v Lawter (NZ) Ltd [pdf, 384 KB]

   ...compensation in the sum of $50,000 for hurt, humiliation and injury to feelings, pursuant to s 123(1)(c)(i) of the Employment Relations Act 2000 (the Act); (b) payment of compensation in a sum equivalent to three months lost wages pursuant to s 128(2) of the Act being $23,013; (c) payment of compensation in respect of lost earnings and future lost earnings to age 65 pursuant to s 128(4) of the Act; and (d) costs. Employment background Lawter is incorporated in New Zealan...

4. [2022] NZEmpC 151 Kang v Saena Company Ltd [pdf, 378 KB]

   ...seek that confirmation. [127] An issue arose from the fact that it transpired Mr Kang had raised his text query using Ms Weon’s cell phone number and not Mr Hwang’s. It was Ms Weon, who was not a director of SCL, that sent the texts. [128] In my view, it was reasonable for Mr Kang to believe that the texts were sent with the authority of SCL. They were sent from a phone number used in the job advertisement for the role he had applied for at the outset, which unquestionably...

5. [2024] NZEmpC 226 Glenfield College BOT & Ors v Anderson [pdf, 272 KB]

   ...Ltd v Unsworth [2023] NZEmpC 180. See too Board of Trustees of Southland Boys High School v Jackson [2022] NZEmpC 136, [2022] ERNZ 565. 21 I must assess what remuneration was lost “as a result of the grievance”: Employment Relations Act, s 128(1). notice of termination under cl 10.2.6). Even then, there are multiple responsibilities upon the employer such as making reasonable efforts to locate alternative employment for the employee (see, for example, cl 10.2.5), and t...

6. [2024] NZEmpC 226 Glenfield College BOT & Ors v Anderson [pdf, 365 KB]

   ...Ltd v Unsworth [2023] NZEmpC 180. See too Board of Trustees of Southland Boys High School v Jackson [2022] NZEmpC 136, [2022] ERNZ 565. 21 I must assess what remuneration was lost “as a result of the grievance”: Employment Relations Act, s 128(1). notice of termination under cl 10.2.6). Even then, there are multiple responsibilities upon the employer such as making reasonable efforts to locate alternative employment for the employee (see, for example, cl 10.2.5), and t...

7. [2018] NZEmpC 59 Nel v ASB Bank Ltd [pdf, 329 KB]

   ...said, it is well established that the relevant provisions of the general rules of evidence in the EA may guide the Court in the exercise of its broad discretion under s 189(2) of the Act. Ms Stewart, counsel for Mr Nel, emphasised the sub-section does not, however, permit “evidential open slather”.4 A principled approach should be adopted. For present purposes, ss 7 and 8 of the EA provide the appropriate guidance. [21] In Pacific Plastic Recyclers Ltd v Foo, Goddard C...

8. [2021] NZEmpC 71 Bowen v Bank of New Zealand [pdf, 241 KB]

   ...exercising the discretion in that way. [31] BNZ’s main point on discretion was that removing the proceedings would deprive it of its important right to challenge the Authority’s determination in the Court. That is not a strong argument. Section 178 clearly envisages removal without a hearing in the Authority, which would bring with it the result that the case would be heard for the first time in the Court. That is a consequence that has been acknowledged several times by...

9. [2011] NZEmpC 160 Angus & McKean v Ports of Auckland Ltd [pdf, 154 KB]

   ...Judges who will hear the substantive proceedings, other Judges, members of the Employment Relations Authority, practitioners, and others involved in employment relations, with guidance about the interpretation and application of two new important sections of the Employment Relations Act 2000 (the Act). Those new sections change the previous law about the test of justification for dismissal or disadvantage in employment (s 103A) and the test for reinstatement (s 125). [2] By far...

10. [2021] NZEmpC 59 Humphrey v Canterbury District Health Board [pdf, 242 KB]

    ...relationship, 1 Humphrey v Chief Executive of the Ministry of Health [2021] NZERA 43 (Member Cheyne). 2 Reid v New Zealand Fire Service Commission [1998] 2 ERNZ 250 at 280 (EC); Reid v New Zealand Fire Service Commission [1999] 1 ERNZ 104 (CA). 3 Section 127(4). 4 Section 3. the obligations both parties have to be responsive and communicative, and that issues ought to be dealt with promptly and between the parties if possible - in other words, supporting constructive...