Employment Court of New Zealand Te Kōti Take Mahi o Aotearoa

[2015] NZEmpC 188 Randwick Meat Co Ltd v Burns (Judgment of Judge Ford, 21 October 2015) UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – OPPOSED APPLICATION TO REMOVE CLAIM TO COURT – issues in the sets of proceedings involved same parties and were sufficiently similar or related to justify removal - Held, dismissal proceeding was properly removed to the Court – application for order to refer matter back to Authority is dismissed – Costs reserved.

[2015] NZEmpC 185 Lewis v JP Morgan Chase Bank N.A. (Costs Judgment of Judge Couch, 19 October 2015) COSTS – plaintiff wholly unsuccessful in its challenge – entitled to reasonable contribution to costs – Held, plaintiff to pay $3,700 in costs.

Negligence / car collision / Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004, r 5.9 / Applicant and Respondent not insured / Applicant claimed costs for his car that was written off and transport costs / HELD: Respondent failed to stop his vehicle / therefore, Tribunal found Respondent was negligent having breached duty of care owed to Applicant / claim allowed, Respondent ordered to pay Applicant $2,350 being the pre-accident value of car fixed by Tribunal / no evidence produced as to transport costs

[2015] NZEmpC 182 Juahm Industries Co Ltd v Isnanto - (Judgment of Judge Corkill, 10 October 2015)  APPLICATION TO STRIKE OUT CHALLENGE – principles applying to strike-out application discussed – issue as to jurisdiction to resolve the challenge – s236(3) and s179 of the Employment Relations Act 2000 considered – making of representation order by Authority in this instance did not have an irreversible and substantive effect – Held, application for strike out granted - Court does not have jurisdiction to consider challenge – costs reserved.

08.10.2015 | Judge Harvey | Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993, section 79 | Costs

[2015] NZEmpC 176 Lean Meats Oamaru Ltd v NZ Meat Workers & Related Trades Union Inc - (Judgment of Judge B A Corkill, 6 October 2015)  CHALLENGE – alleged non-compliance with statutory provisions for paid rest breaks – alleged non-compliance with Part 6D of the Employment Relations Act – whether parties included compensation for rest breaks in the collective employment agreements - principles as to interpretation of employment agreements applied – Held, Authority determination upheld, challenge dismissed - Union entitled to costs – parties to attempt to resolve quantum issues directly.

[2015] NZEmpC 174 McIvor v Saad (Costs Judgment of Chief Judge G L Colgan, 2 October 2015) COSTS –uplift granted because of unreasonable rejection of settlement offers – calculation should be on hours actually worked each week before dismissal –costs of $9,333 – wages of $8,937.50 (before tax).

[2015] NZEmpC 170 Mahamai v Belley (Labour Inspector) - (Judgment of Judge B A Corkill, 30 September 2015) .CHALLENGE TO COMPLIANCE, PENALTY AND COSTS ORDER – proceeding not dismissed on frivolous or vexatious grounds – evidence established plaintiff was employer – Minimum Wages Act 1983 considered – Plaintiff’s personal circumstances considered in light of plaintiff’s ability to pay the outstanding debts owed – whether payments by instalments were appropriate – whether there should be a penalty for non-payment – Held, compliance order issued for payment of unpaid wages, holiday pay and interest – all to be paid within 12 months of judgment date – to be reviewed at telephone conference

[2015] NZEmpC 168 Lawson v NZ Transport Agency (Interlocutory Judgment of Judge Christina Inglis, 29 September 2015) APPLICATIONS FOR STAY, SECURITY FOR COSTS – both applications opposed – need to balance needs of parties – no security for costs ordered - stay granted on condition that sum of $17,500 be paid into the Court.

Appeal against decision to cancel Accommodation supplement. Likelihood that existing mortgage did not entirely reflect acquisition of accommodation. Not enough evidence that the proportion of the appellant’s existing mortgage used for the acquisition of accommodation met the cost threshold to be entitled to Accommodation Supplement. Cancellation of the Accommodation Supplement paid in error was appropriate. Appeal dismissed.

[2015] NZEmpC 161 Vince Roberts Electrical Ltd v Carroll and Roberts - (Costs Judgment of Judge M E Perkins, 18 September 2015) COSTS – principles for awarding costs listed – obstructive tactics and rejected Calderbank offer taken into account - costs of $60,000 awarded to defendant

[2015] NZEmpC 159 Smith Crane & Construction Ltd v Hall - (Costs judgment of Judge B A Corkill, 17 September 2015) COSTS – Da Cruz principles still apply – notional daily rate applied – no reason for uplift or decrease in usual starting rate of 66 per cent of costs actually and reasonably incurred for costs in the Authority – sch 2 and 3 of High Court Rules applied – awarded costs in the Court increased from starting rate of 66 per cent of costs actually and reasonably incurred to 75 per cent due to Calderbank offer - GST neutral position adopted – Held, $1,821.56 awarded to defendant for costs in Authority – $7,800 awarded to defendant for costs in Court.