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

3638 items matching your search terms

  1. [2015] NZEmpC 189 Kirby v The NZ China Friendship Society [PDF, 173 KB]

    [2015] NZEmpC 189 Kirby v The NZ China Friendship Society - (Judgment of Judge Corkill, 22 October 2015). DE NOVO CHALLENGE - Whether employee or unpaid volunteer – s 6 Employment Relations Act 2000 ‘meaning of employee’ considered – whether there was expectation for reward for work rendered – whether there was any reward for work rendered – reliability of evidence discussed – no reasonable basis for an expectation of reward for work undertaken as volunteer – wages were not paid only provision for travel and associated expenses - Held – challenge dismissed

  2. [2015] NZEmpC 186 The Commissioner of Salford School v Campbell [PDF, 299 KB]

    [2015] NZEmpC 186 The Commissioner of Salford School v Campbell (Judgment of Judge Corkill, 20 October 2015)  ISSUES AS TO COSTS – whether defendant should have costs award against her in respect of her unsuccessful application for an interim reinstatement order – Calderbank offer considered – costs should follow the event – daily tariff for 5.5 days Authority hearing with no increase or decrease of costs justified - contribution of 66 per cent of actual costs incurred in Court was reasonable - Held, plaintiff to pay defendant a contribution towards both costs in Authority and in the Court.

  3. [2015] NZEmpC 181 Allied Investments Ltd v Guise [PDF, 167 KB]

    [2015] NZEmpC 181 Allied Investments Ltd v Guise - (Judgment of Judge Ford, 16 October 2015)  DE NOVO CHALLENGE - UNJUSTIFIED CONSTRUCIVE DISMISSAL - Tripartite employment arrangement – constructive dismissal principles identified – whether there was constructive dismissal – whether risk of resignation was reasonably foreseeable – whether dismissal was justified – s103A of Employment Relations Act applied - employer breached duties owed towards employee - dismissal was caused by breach of duty by employer – employer must have foreseen that as a result of its breach of duty it was inevitable that employee would resign – Held, claim upheld - award for loss of wages, compensation for hurt and humiliation – 20 per cent reduction for contributory conduct

  4. [2015] NZEmpC 180 Keepa v Go Bus Transport Ltd [PDF, 150 KB]

    [2015] NZEmpC 180 Keepa v Go Bus Transport Ltd (Judgment of Judge M E Perkins, 12 October 2015)  CLAIM FOR UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – plaintiff subject of several customer complaints – performance discussion and disciplinary meetings held - nemo judex in sua causa not appropriate– employer carrying out disciplinary function not acting judicially - accord and satisfaction considered – plaintiff resigned – no dismissal or constructive dismissal – challenge dismissed.

  5. [2015] NZEmpC 182 Juahm Industries Co Ltd v Isnanto [PDF, 103 KB]

    [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.

  6. [2015] NZEmpC 178 Twentyman v The Warehouse Ltd interlocutory [PDF, 116 KB]

    [2015] NZEmpC 178 Twentyman v The Warehouse Ltd (Interlocutory Judgment of Chief Judge G L Colgan, 8 October 2015) SECURITY FOR COSTS – ORDER FOR STAY – plaintiff unsuccessful at Authority and ordered to pay costs plus penalty of $1500 – security for costs would deny challenge from proceeding – statutory right to proceed – execution of Authority orders stayed on condition that security for past costs excluding penalty be paid into the court

  7. [2015] NZEmpC 176 Lean Meats Oamaru Ltd v NZ Meat Workers & Related Trades Union Inc [PDF, 222 KB]

    [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.

  8. [2015] NZEmpC 177 Southall v Tuau [PDF, 118 KB]

    [2015] NZEmpC 177 Southall v Tuau - (Judgment of Judge B A Corkill, 6 October 2015) CHALLENGE TO COSTS DETERMINATION – Wide discretionary power of Court to award costs – to be exercised according to principle – principles applying to Authority awards of costs considered – it was not unreasonable for the two Calderbank offers to be declined in their particular contexts – both Calderbank offers not relevant to consideration of costs – suitable for costs to follow event – normal daily tariff applies – some discontinuance for one aspect of claim - Held, challenge dismissed

  9. [2015] NZEmpC 169 Tertiary Education Union v Vice-Chancellor University of Auckland [PDF, 123 KB]

    [2015] NZEmpC 169 Tertiary Education Union v Vice-Chancellor University of Auckland - (Judgment of Judge Christina Inglis, 30 September 2015)  INTERPRETATION OF CLAUSE IN COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT – whether words of agreement meant that Vice-Chancellor could not make an amendment to policy without agreement of union – contract interpretation principles summarised – place of extrinsic materials considered – Vice-Chancellor may amend policy without agreement once participatory process is completed.

  10. [2015] NZEmpC 170 Mahamai v Belley (Labour Inspector) [PDF, 171 KB]

    [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

  11. [2015] NZEmpC 171 Nisha v LSG Sky Chefs New Zealand Ltd [PDF, 488 KB]

    [2015] NZEmpC 171 Nisha v LSG Sky Chefs New Zealand Ltd - (Judgment of Judge B A Corkill, 30 September 2015)  UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE – CONSTRUCTIVE DISMISSAL - Employment transferred to rival business under Part 6A of the Employment Relations Act 2000 – issues as to whether promotion and increase in wages prior to transfer was genuine – terminology and purpose of s69I addressed – whether sham principles applied - employees terms deliberately inflated - representations made to subsequent employer were fictitious – employee could not have had legitimate expectation that employer had provided anything other than fictional increases – undue delay on part of employer in resolving uncertainties – stress and depression due to employment - Held, disadvantage grievance upheld – compensation of $1500 for humiliation, loss of dignity and injury to feelings after allowance for contributory behaviour

  12. [2015] NZEmpC 165 NZ Meat Workers & Related Trades Union Inc v AFFCO NZ Ltd [PDF, 86 KB]

    [2015] NZEmpC 165 NZ Meat Workers & Related Trades Union Inc v AFFCO NZ Ltd - (Oral Interlocutory judgment, 23 September 2015). APPLICATION FOR FURTHER AMENDMENTS TO STATEMENT OF CLAIM – REQUEST FOR FURTHER PARTICULARS – application for amendment declined – delay difficult and no prejudice to plaintiff – request for particulars not filed correctly and close to being a legal argument which can be raised at hearing– mediation not ruled out but not possible before date of hearing