Appellate judgments 2026
Supreme Court
Court of Appeal
[2026] NZCA 180 Air New Zealand Ltd v McGearty [PDF, 141 KB](Judgment of the Court 14 May 2026) APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL GRANTED (1) whether the Employment Court applied the correct principles of contractual interpretation when interpreting the collective agreement (2) whether the Court applied the proper test for justification when assessing the claim of unjustified disadvantage (3) whether the Court erred in its application of s 35 of the Human Rights Act 1993 when assessing the claim of unlawful discrimination). Leave on all three questions granted; leave on the first question (which potentially engages the proscription on granting leave on a question relating to the construction of a collective employment agreement) is conditional on the applicant advancing its argument on the basis affirmed by the Supreme Court in Bryson v Three Foot Six Ltd and elaborated in New Zealand Air Line Pilots’ Association Inc v Air New Zealand Ltd.
[2026] NZCA 149 Burgess v Tutton Sienko and Hill Partnership [PDF, 199 KB]
[2026] NZCA 147 Maritime Union of New Zealand Incorporation v Lyttelton Port Company Limited [PDF, 219 KB](Judgment of the Court, 29 April 2026) APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL – proposed appeal falls outside scope of s 214(1) Employment Relations Act 2000 – applicant alleges Judge misapplied interpretative principles in construing collective agreement – any such error must extend beyond the particular agreement in issue – proposed argument focused on close textual analysis of specific clauses – no comparable clauses or question of principle identified – no question of general or public importance – application dismissed
[2026] NZCA 84 VXO v Health New Zealand [PDF, 153 KB] EXTENSION OF TIME – APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL – extension of time granted – issues advanced are largely to do with the respondent’s conduct, not the Judge’s decision – are of personal but not public importance – dispute findings on the evidence, not the application of law – application of law was orthodox – application for leave to appeal dismissed
[2026] NZCA 33 Breen v Prime Resources Co Ltd [PDF, 375 KB]. APPEAL - JURISDICTION - Employment Court found that it was jurisdictionally barred from awarding remedies because the claim was a "dispute", not a "grievance" - detailed history of distinction between dispute and grievance discussed - jurisdictional bar only applies when the issue "solely" arises because of a "dispute" - question is whether the claim turns entirely on a finding about the correctness or otherwise of the employer's genuine interpretation of a provision - employer's calculation method in this case was extraneous to the clause in dispute, being a unilateral decision made without consultation on the basis of a factual assumption - no jurisdictional bar - appeal allowed - matter remitted to Employment Court.
[2026] NZCA 20 Dowlut v Aurecon NZ Ltd [PDF, 202 KB] APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL – judgment set out correct legal principles and was cognisant of matters raised in the questions of law identified by the applicant – application dismissed
This page was last updated: