[2022] NZEmpC 224 AlKazaz v Enterprise IT LTD (Costs Judgment of Chief Judge Christina Inglis, 7 December 2022) COSTS – GUIDELINE SCALE – costs awarded.
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.
3526 items matching your search terms
-
[2022] NZEmpC 224 AlKazaz v Enterprise IT LTD [PDF, 179 KB] -
[2022] NZEmpC 223 FGH v RST [PDF, 688 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 223 FGH v RST (Judgment of Judge B A Corkill, 6 December 2022) PERSONAL GRIEVANCE - UNJUSTIFIABLE DISADVANTAGE - social media posts can be subject of disciplinary process - initiating employment investigation into social media posts was fair and reasonable in the circumstances - placing employee on paid sick leave was fair and reasonable in the circumstances - employee was not unjustifiably disadvantaged.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 222 Gumbeze v The Chief Executive of Oranga Tamariki [PDF, 225 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 222 Gumbeze v The Chief Executive of Oranga Tamariki – Ministry for Children (Judgment of Judge K G Smith, 5 December 2022) APPLICATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE CHALLENGE – delay was brief and adequately explained – no prejudice to respondent if application was granted – application granted.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 221 Pilgrim v The Attorney-General [PDF, 179 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 221 Pilgrim v The Attorney-General (Interlocutory Judgment (No 1) of Chief Judge Christina Inglis, 2 December 2022) APPOINTMENT OF COURT EXPERT – expert appointed.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 219 Hynds Pipe Systems Ltd v Cheng [PDF, 124 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 219 Hynds Pipe Systems Ltd v Cheng (Oral Judgment of Judge K G Smith, 1 December 2022) SEARCH ORDER – search order concluded – further orders made by consent.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 220 Shah Enterprise NZ Ltd v A Labour Inspector [PDF, 164 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 220 Shah Enterprise NZ Ltd v A Labour Inspector of Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (Costs Judgment of Judge J C Holden, 1 December 2022) COSTS – GUIDELINE SCALE – costs awarded.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 218 New Zealand Nurses Organisation v Te Whatu Ora Health New Zealand [PDF, 326 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 218 New Zealand Nurses Organisation v Te Whatu Ora Health New Zealand (Interlocutory Judgment of Judge B A Corkill, 30 November 2022) APPLICATION FOR A REPRESENTATION ORDER – unions have standing and are entitled to represent their members – union members have common interest – representation order made – DISCLOSURE – notice of disclosure restricted.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 217 Karunanayake v FED [PDF, 191 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 217 Karunanayake v FED (Judgment of Judge J C Holden, 30 November 2022) NATURE OF EMPLOYMENT – defendant was an employee – defendant must be paid for work done – unpaid wages and holiday pay awarded – NON-PUBLICATION – Court recognises publication of the defendant’s name may harm future employment prospects – proceedings were simply taken to enforce minimum employment standards and should not result in such consequences – non-publication granted for defendant – non-publication not granted for plaintiff.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 216 Caisteal An Ime Ltd v Faithfull [PDF, 240 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 216 Caisteal An Ime Ltd v Faithfull (Judgment of Judge K G Smith, 30 November 2022) PERSONAL GRIEVANCE - UNJUSTIFIABLE DISMISSAL - employee was permanent part-time, not casual - employee did not resign but was constructively dismissed - no justification for dismissal - Authority had miscalculated lost wages - remedies for lost wage reduced - challenge otherwise dismissed.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 215 Drivesure Ltd v McQuillan [PDF, 154 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 215 Drivesure Ltd v McQuillan (Costs Judgment of Judge J C Holden, 30 November 2022) COSTS – GUIDELINE SCALE – costs awarded.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 214 Yu v Joe and Zhou Ltd [PDF, 142 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 214 Yu v Joe and Zhou Ltd (Consent Judgment of Judge K G Smith, 29 November 2022) CONSENT.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 213 Ashby v NIWA Vessel Management Ltd [PDF, 153 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 213 Ashby v NIWA Vessel Management Ltd (Costs Judgment of Judge J C Holden, 29 November 2022) COSTS – GUIDELINE SCALE – costs awarded.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 212 Caisteal An Ime Ltd v A Labour Inspector [PDF, 196 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 212 Caisteal An Ime Ltd v A Labour Inspector (Interlocutory Judgment of Judge K G Smith, 29 November 2022) APPLICATION FOR STAY OF EXECUTION – company cashflow would be significantly impacted by paying penalties now – stay granted.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 211 Gera v Platform 4 Group Ltd [PDF, 135 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 211 Gera v Platform 4 Group Ltd (Consent Judgment of Judge Kathryn Beck, 29 November 2022) CONSENT.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 210 Potgieter v Bliss Beauty NZ Ltd [PDF, 162 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 210 Potgieter v Bliss Beauty NZ Ltd (Interlocutory Judgment of Chief Judge Christina Inglis, 25 November 2022) APPLICATION TO EXTEND FREEZING AND ANCILLARY ORDERS – application granted by consent.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 209 Anderson v Noa Farms (2014) Ltd [PDF, 208 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 209 Anderson v Noa Farms (2014) Ltd (Judgment of Judge Kathryn Beck, 24 November 2022) APPLICATION FOR COMPLIANCE ORDER – defendant has not paid amounts owed – compliance order made.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 208 O’Leary v Umbrella Multimedia Ltd (in liquidation) [PDF, 164 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 208 O’Leary v Umbrella Multimedia Ltd (in liquidation) (Judgment of Judge J C Holden, 24 November 2022) ENFORCEMENT OF COMPLIANCE ORDER – employer has not complied with Authority compliance order – breach is serious and warrants sanction – employer fined $10,000.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 207 Arohanui Hospice Service Trust v New Zealand Nurses Organisation [PDF, 190 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 207 Arohanui Hospice Service Trust v New Zealand Nurses Organisation (Judgment of Judge J C Holden, 22 November 2022) PUBLIC HOLIDAYS - INTERPRETATION OF COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT - whether public holiday would otherwise be a "working day" - collective agreement contains agreement on what days would otherwise be working days - definition of "fixed" - clause applies to any employee that does not work on fixed days of the week.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 206 The Chief of New Zealand Defence Force v Darnley [PDF, 216 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 206 The Chief of New Zealand Defence Force v Darnley (Reissued Judgment of Judge Kathryn Beck, 16 November 2022) COSTS - GUIDELINE SCALE - partial success by each party - costs considered separately for each substantive issue - costs awarded.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 205 The Chief of New Zealand Defence Force v Darnley [PDF, 190 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 205 The Chief of New Zealand Defence Force v Darnley (Recall Judgment of Judge Kathryn Beck, 16 November 2022) RECALL – mistake in calculation.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 204 The Chief of New Zealand Defence Force v Darnley [PDF, 215 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 204 The Chief of New Zealand Defence Force v Darnley (Costs Judgment of Judge Kathryn Beck, 16 November 2022) COSTS - GUIDELINE SCALE - partial success by each party - costs considered separately for each substantive issue - costs awarded.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 203 Potgieter v Bliss Beauty NZ Ltd [PDF, 147 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 203 Potgieter v Bliss Beauty NZ Ltd (Judgment of Chief Judge Christina Inglis, 15 November 2022) APPLICATION FOR FREEZING AND ANCILIARY ORDERS – application granted.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 201 Young v Port of Tauranga Ltd [PDF, 216 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 201 Young v Port of Tauranga Ltd (Judgment of Judge J C Holden, 9 November 2022) INTERIM REINSTATEMENT – serious issue to be tried on unjustifiable dismissal – no vacant position to reinstate employee into – employee’s post-termination conduct was “extreme” – permanent reinstatement not seriously arguable – balance of convenience and interests of justice point against reinstatement – interim reinstatement not ordered.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 202 Hynds Pipe Systems Ltd v Cheng [PDF, 141 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 202 Hynds Pipe Systems Ltd v Cheng (Judgment of Judge J C Holden, 9 November 2022) APPLICATION TO VARY SEARCH ORDERS – application granted.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 200 Stewart v AFFCO New Zealand Ltd [PDF, 309 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 200 Stewart v AFFCO New Zealand Ltd (Judgment of Judge B A Corkill, 8 November 2022) AVAILABILITY PROVISION – UNJUSTIFIABLE DISADVANTAGE – availability provision was included in employment agreement – employee was disadvantaged by existence of the clause regardless of whether it was strictly enforced – parties to resolve remedies – personal grievance was raised within time, as limitation period started when employee learned that the availability provision was invalid – remedies start from the date of availability provision being signed – Employment Court has jurisdiction to consider a quantum meruit claim.