Employment Court of New Zealand Te Kōti Take Mahi o Aotearoa

Labour Inspector, Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment v Civic City Ltd [2013] NZEmpC 198 [Oral Judgment of Chief Judge G L Colgan, 4 November 2013] APPLICATION FOR RENEWAL OF FREEZING ORDERS – Application granted

Electrical Union 2001 Inc v Mighty River Power [2013] NZEmpC 197 [Judgment of Chief Judge Colgan, 24 October 2013] INTERPRETATION OF COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT – Whether random drug and alcohol testing policy implemented by the defendant is in breach of provisions of collective agreement – Whether agreement should be interpreted to promote health and safety obligations arising under agreement – Health and safety provisions in agreement cannot override or contradict other provisions in agreement – Safeguards on drug and alcohol testing were implemented to ensure that health and safety objectives were not pursued at the expense of rights and liberties of employees – Whether random testing policy inconsistent with privacy clause in agreement – Requirement that testing be conducted on a “case by case basis” means employee consent is required before samples taken – Whether random urine testing constitutes “medical treatment” for purposes of s 11 NZBORA – Bodily samples taken for evidential purpos…

Harris v TSNZ Pulp & Paper Maintenance Ltd [2013] NZEmpC 194 [Interlocutory Judgment of Chief Judge G L Colgan, 21 October 2013] APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO ADDUCE FURTHER EVIDENCE – Section 189(2) Employment Relations Act 2000 – Sections 8, 98 Evidence Act 2006 – In trial plaintiff gave, without notice, evidence of alleged oral pre-contractual representations made by representative of the defendant – Defendant claims to be unfairly disadvantaged in not adducing evidence from the representative during hearing – Ends of justice served from receiving additional evidence – Failure of defendant to adduce evidence at hearing cannot be held against it – Plaintiff also entitled to call or recall witness or witnesses to rebut defendant’s intended evidence – Impracticable for issue to be resolved through affidavits – Examination of witnesses will need to be heard in Court – Application granted

Gupta v Infosys Technologies (Australia) Pty Ltd [2013] NZEmpC 192 [Judgment of Judge Ford, 18 October 2013] APPLICATION FOR STRIKE OUT – Challenge filed by plaintiff in respect of determination of the Authority declining interim reinstatement – No challenge filed in respect of substantive determination – Plaintiff seeks substantive relief from Court – Court has no jurisdiction to order substantive relief on challenge to Authority determination relating to interim relief – Plaintiff’s claim so hopeless it cannot possibly succeed – Extension of time to file amended statement of claim only likely to prolong difficulties for plaintiff’s counsel – Application granted.

Ohms v Vice-Chancellor Auckland University of Technology - judgment of Judge A D Ford.

Hook v Stream Group (NZ) Pty Ltd

Sealord Group Ltd v Pickering

Snowdon v Radio New Zealand Ltd [2013] NZEmpC 183 [Interlocutory Judgment of Judge A D Ford, 1 October 2013] APPLICATION FOR ORDER ENTERING INTO JUDGMENT –  In March 2013 Court directed plaintiff to file amended statement of claim if it wished – Amended statement of claim filed – No amended statement of defence filed by defendant – Submitted that defendant accepted all allegations in pleadings – Necessary to file amended statement of defence only where fresh cause of action is introduced – Amended statement of claim discloses no new matters – Plaintiff only made inquiries three days prior to commencement of hearing – No prejudice suffered – Application refused.

George v Auckland Council [2013] NZEmpC 179 [Judgment of Judge Christina Inglis, 27 September 2013] UNJUSTIFIABLE DISMISSAL – No evidence of bias or disparity of treatment on part of defendants – Fact that alternatives were open to defendants does not mean it was not entitled to commence informal disciplinary process – Dishonesty during disciplinary process capable of giving rise to dismissal – Unnecessary to conduct separate disciplinary process in respect of dishonesty allegations – Defendant had adequate basis to commence investigation into allegations –  Plaintiff given full notice of these concerns – Unlikely that heightened standards apply in disciplinary processes involving senior managers – No evidence defendant breached contractual obligations of good faith – Open to defendant to find that plaintiff had committed serious misconduct – Dismissal is what a fair and reasonable employer would have done in the circumstances – Claim dismissed BREACH OF CONTRACT – No evidence that bre…

Hally Labels Ltd v Powell [2013] NZEmpC 182 [Interlocutory Judgment of Judge ME Perkins, 27 September 2013] APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO FILE THIRD AMENDED STATEMENT OF CLAIM – Amendments sought in respect of damages claim for costs incurred in High Court and alleged breach of implied undertaking – Costs as damages claim not a new cause of action – Encompassed in broad claim for damages – Defendants opposition to grant of leave more akin to strike-out application – Defendant unlikely to suffer prejudice – Leave granted – APPLICATION FOR CONTINUATION OF FREEZING ORDER – Circumstances have not materially changed since order originally granted – Concerns over financial position of defendant not diminished – Order renewed and continued.

Snowdon v Radio New Zealand Ltd - interlocutory judgment of Judge A D Ford.

Tranzit Coachlines Wairarapa Ltd v Morgan [2013] NZEmpC 175 [Judgment of Full Court, 20 September 2013] HOLIDAY PAY – Holidays Act 2003 – Whether first defendants entitled to payment for Christmas Day – Employees available for additional work during school holiday periods – Authority therefore erred in finding first defendants on annual leave pursuant to s 40 – Question purely one of whether Christmas Day was otherwise a working day for first defendants under s 12 – Clear from evidence that Christmas Day would not otherwise be a working day – First defendants not entitled to payment.