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

3526 items matching your search terms

  1. [2023] NZEmpC 105 Pilgrim & Ors v Attorney-General & Ors [PDF, 596 KB]

    [2023] NZEmpC 105 Pilgrim & Ors v Attorney-General & Ors (Judgment of Chief Judge Christina Inglis, 13 July 2023) APPLICATION FOR DECLARATION OF EMPLOYMENT STATUS - workers undertook cooking, cleaning, laundry and food preparation duties in religious community - work was rewarded by necessities of life and being permitted to remain in the community - workers were not volunteers - work being "domestic" in nature not a relevant factor - work was in the nature of employment according to objective indicators - employment status is not inconsistent with community's religious freedom - workers were employees - application granted.  

  2. [2023] NZEmpC 102 van Kleef v Alliance Group Ltd [PDF, 273 KB]

    [2023] NZEmpC 102 van Kleef v Alliance Group Ltd (Interlocutory Judgment (No 3) of Judge B A Corkill, 3 July 2023) APPLICATION FOR FURTHER AND BETTER DISCLOSURE – obligation to disclose has been discharged – application dismissed - APPLICATION TO STRIKE OUT FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION – significant delay by employee – employee’s cause of action is not without merit – interests of justice point away from strike out – application dismissed.

  3. [2023] NZEmpC 101 GF v Comptroller of Customs [PDF, 513 KB]

    [2023] NZEmpC 101 GF v Comptroller of Customs (Judgment of Chief Judge Christina Inglis, 30 June 2023) UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – UNJUSTIFIED DISADAVANTAGE – TIKANGA – PUBLIC SERVICE EMPLOYER “GOOD EMPLOYER” OBLIGATIONS  – dismissal in relation to COVID-19 vaccine – unvaccinated worker – tikanga a relevant consideration – employer incorporated tikanga/tikanga values into relationship – at very least should have been considered – Public Service Act 2020 good employer standard – heightened obligations on public service employers – deficient communication and engagement with employees choosing not to be vaccinated – no individualised health and safety assessment – predetermined outcome – process failed to meet the baseline fair and reasonable employer standard ­– breach of good faith – UPDATE TO COMPENSATION BANDS  –  $25,000 compensation – 3 months’ lost wages awarded – formal recommendations made.

  4. [2023] NZEmpC 99 Speed v Board of Trustees of Wellington Girls College [PDF, 254 KB]

    [2023] NZEmpC 99 Speed v Board of Trustees of Wellington Girls College (Judgment of Judge K G Smith, 23 June 2023) APPLICATIONS FOR NON-PUBLICATION AND TAKE-DOWN ORDERS - Court has jurisdiction to make retrospective non-publication or anonymisation orders - insufficient basis for non-publication or anonymisation orders to be made - Court does not have jurisdiction in the circumstances to make take-down orders - applications declined.

  5. [2023] NZEmpC 94 Soapi v Pick Hawke’s Bay Inc [PDF, 255 KB]

    [2023] NZEmpC 94 Soapi v Pick Hawke’s Bay Inc (Interlocutory Judgment of Judge K G Smith, 21 June 2023) APPLICATION FOR SECURITY FOR COSTS - security for costs order may have effect of ending litigation - right to access to justice outweighs concerns about not being able to recover costs - application declined - APPLICATIONS TO INTERVENE - both interveners have interest in broader issues regarding minimum wage and wage protection - applications granted.

  6. [2023] NZEmpC 92 New Zealand Nurses Organisation Inc v Te Whatu Ora – Health New Zealand [PDF, 331 KB]

    [2023] NZEmpC 92 New Zealand Nurses Organisation Inc v Te Whatu Ora – Health New Zealand (Interlocutory Judgment (No 4) of Judge B A Corkill, 20 June 2023) CHALLENGE TO OBJECTION TO DISCLOSURE –it is in public interest for bargaining documents to be protected given the confidential context of bargaining – APPLICATION FOR VERIFICATION ORDER – no justification for order – application declined.

  7. [2023] NZEmpC 89 A Labour Inspector of the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment v Prisha’s Hospitality (2017) Ltd T/A Royal Cambridge Indian Restaurant [PDF, 787 KB]

    [2023] NZEmpC 89 A Labour Inspector of the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment v Prisha’s Hospitality (2017) Ltd T/A Royal Cambridge Indian Restaurant (Judgment of Judge J C Holden, 16 June 2023) MINIMUM ENTITLEMENTS – SERIOUS BREACH – ARREARS – declarations of serious breach made against two employers for breaches of minimum entitlements in relation to seven employees – employees not paid minimum wage – employees not paid holiday pay – WAGES PROTECTION ACT – DEDUCTIONS – PREMIUMS – unlawful deductions made from employees pay – deductions relying on general deductions clause require prior consultation – deductions for failing to provide notice period unlawful and unreasonable – employees required to pay premiums – premiums are unlawful even if not paid to employer directly – DEFINITION OF EMPLOYEE – DEFINITION OF VOLUNTEER – definition of volunteer requires individual to be a volunteer as well as not expecting or receiving reward – parties cannot contract out of minimum sta…