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

3640 items matching your search terms

  1. [2013] NZEmpC 221 Bali v SRG Holdings Ltd [PDF, 79 KB]

    Bali v SRG Holdings Ltd [2013] NZEmpC 221 [Judgment of Judge M E Perkins, 29 November 2013] APPLICATION FOR COMPLIANCE ORDERS – Expiry of plaintiff’s work permit – Employment terminated – Record of settlement reached between parties – Plaintiff to be re-offered employment provided immigration status could be resolved – Plaintiff fails to resolve immigration status – Defendant refuses plaintiff’s recommencement of employment – Plaintiff seeks compliance orders in respect of the record of settlement – Application declined by Authority – Plaintiff failed to take any steps to rectify immigration status– Defendants could not be expected to keep offer open indefinitely – Application refused
  3. [2013] NZEmpC 219 Fox v Hereworth School Trust Board [PDF, 78 KB]

    Fox v Hereworth School Trust Board [2013] NZEmpC 219 [Interlocutory Judgment of Chief Judge G L Colgan, 28 November 2013] APPLICATION FOR NON-PARTY DISCLOSURE – Disclosure objected to on grounds that documents sought provided to Ombudsman in connection with investigation – Whether privilege under s 26(3) Ombudsmen Act 1975 provides grounds for objection pursuant to public interest immunity under reg 44(3)(c) Employment Court Regulations 2000 – Public interest not injured by disclosure – Section 26(3) provides exemption for Ombudsmen from being prosecuted or sued in civil or criminal proceedings – Not a ground for resisting production of documents – Order that non-party disclose all documents relating to the litigation in his possession – Non-party to meet own costs of opposing application
  4. [2013] NZEmpC 218 Cross v Onerahi Hotel Ltd [PDF, 68 KB]

    Cross v Onerahi Hotel Ltd [2013] NZEmpC 218 [Oral Interlocutory Judgment of Judge Christina Inglis, 27 November 2013] APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT – Fixture set for 11 December – Difficulties for defendant’s witnesses in attending hearing – Necessary to consider interests of justice – Adjournment disruptive to other litigants waiting for fixture – Only one of defendant’s witnesses a key witness – Plaintiff entitled to have challenge dealt with in timely manner – Application declined.
  23. [2013] NZEmpC 199 Sealord Group Ltd v Pickering [PDF, 44 KB]

    Sealord Group Ltd v Pickering [2013] NZEmpC 199 [Interlocutory Judgment of Judge Christina Inglis, 4 November 2013] APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO FILE STATEMENT OF CLAIM OUT OF TIME – Statement of claim filed one day out of time due to calculation error – Counsel for plaintiff cannot be faulted for not raising issue of timeliness with counsel for defendant on filing date – Requirement of timeliness can only be waived by the Court, not counsel – Satisfied in the interests of justice that leave be granted – Delay minor and result of inadvertent error on part of defendant’s counsel – No suggestion that plaintiff has been prejudiced by delay – Application granted
  24. [2013] NZEmpC 197 Electrical Union 2001 Inc and Anor v Mighty River Power [PDF, 239 KB]

    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…
  25. [2013] NZEmpC 196 Labour Inspector MBIE v Civic City Ltd [PDF, 94 KB]

    Labour Inspector, Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment v Civic City Ltd [2013] NZEmpC 196 [Judgment of Chief Judge G L Colgan, 23 October 2013] APPLICATION FOR FREEZING ORDERS – Respondents ordered to pay applicants over $200,000 by Authority in respect of breaches of employment legislation – Concern respondents may be liquidating assets to move out of country – Freezing order sought – Requirements for freezing order met – Crown exempted under s 65ZC of the Public Finance Act from giving an undertaking as to damages – Application granted – Orders to expire on 4 November 2013