[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.
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.
3630 items matching your search terms
-
[2022] NZEmpC 203 Potgieter v Bliss Beauty NZ Ltd [PDF, 147 KB] -
[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.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 199 Urban Décor Ltd v Yu [PDF, 202 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 199 Urban Décor Ltd v Yu (Costs Judgment of Judge Kathryn Beck, 7 November 2022) COSTS – GUIDELINE SCALE – costs discounted for partial success – reduction for financial circumstances.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 198 SP Blinds Ltd v Hogan [PDF, 150 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 198 SP Blinds Ltd v Hogan (Consent Judgment of Chief Judge Christina Inglis, 4 November 2022) CONSENT.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 197 Hynds Pipe Systems Ltd v Cheng [PDF, 186 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 197 Hynds Pipe Systems Ltd v Cheng (Judgment of Judge J C Holden, 1 November 2022) APPLICATION FOR WITHOUT NOTICE SEARCH ORDERS – case appears strong – potential of serious loss – application granted.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 196 E Tū Inc v Rasier Operations BV [PDF, 239 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 196 E Tū Inc v Rasier Operations BV (Interlocutory Judgment (No 3) of Chief Judge Christina Inglis, 31 October 2022) APPLICATION TO ACCESS AUDIO RECORDING – audio recording was referred to in judgment – public interest in proceedings – confidentiality issues can be dealt with by conditions – application granted on conditions.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 195 New Zealand Port Primary Teachers’ Assoc v Board of Trustees for Rodney College [PDF, 208 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 195 New Zealand Port Primary Teachers’ Assoc v Board of Trustees for Rodney College (Costs Judgment of Judge Kathryn Beck, 26 October 2022) COSTS – GUIDELINE SCALE – costs should lie where they fall in the Authority – costs reduced because of partial success.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 194 Enterprise Motor Group (New Lynn) Ltd v A Labour Inspector of the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment [PDF, 267 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 194 Enterprise Motor Group (New Lynn) Ltd v A Labour Inspector of the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (Judgment of Judge K G Smith, 26 October 2022) MINIMUM STANDARDS – minimum wage compliance when employees are paid by commission – case distinguishable from impermissible averaging cases – employees payments complied with minimum wage – improvement notices are limited by wage and time record obligations – improvement notice varied.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 192 E Tū Inc v Rasier Operations BV [PDF, 483 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 192 E Tū Inc v Rasier Operations BV (Judgment of Chief Judge Christina Inglis, 25 October 2022) APPLICATION FOR DECLARATION OF EMPLOYMENT STATUS - applicants were drivers for Uber - whether defendants are mere facilitators of marketplace or employers - defendants exercise significant control over drivers - drivers cannot realistically be said to run their own businesses - IDENTITY OF EMPLOYER - defendants are sufficiently connected to constitute joint employer - application granted.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 193 Bowen v Bank of New Zealand [PDF, 143 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 193 Bowen v Bank of New Zealand (Interlocutory Judgment (No 2) of Judge J C Holden, 25 October 2022) APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO ADDUCE FURTHER EVIDENCE – further evidence allowed in the interests of justice.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 192 E Tū Inc v Rasier Operations BV (Media Release) [PDF, 181 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 192 E Tū Inc v Rasier Operations BV (Media Release)
-
[2022] NZEmpC 191 McDermott v Employment Relations Authority [PDF, 172 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 191 McDermott v Employment Relations Authority (Costs Judgment of Judge K G Smith, 25 October 2022) COSTS – GUIDELINE SCALE – statements about financial circumstances were not supported by evidence – costs awarded.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 190 Te Whatu Ora – Health New Zealand v Culturesafe NZ Ltd (in liq) [PDF, 252 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 190 Te Whatu Ora – Health New Zealand v Culturesafe NZ Ltd (in liq) (Interlocutory Judgment (No 5) of Judge B A Corkill, 25 October 2022) PROTEST TO JURISDICTION - whether proceedings removed were a "matter" under s 187 of the Employment Relations Act 2000 - broad meaning must be given to the term "matter" - Court has jurisdiction after matter was properly removed - protest to jurisdiction dismissed.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 189 Carver v Metallic Sweeping (1998) Ltd [PDF, 184 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 189 Carver v Metallic Sweeping (1998) Ltd (Judgment of Judge K G Smith, 21 October 2022) APPLICATION TO STRIKE OUT – statement of claim does not comply with regulations and fails to adequately inform defendant – statement of claims struck out.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 188 Atlas Concrete Ltd v Cleland [PDF, 136 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 188 Atlas Concrete Ltd v Cleland (Consent Judgment of Judge Kathryn Beck, 21 October 2022) CONSENT.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 187 Singh v Johnstone [PDF, 136 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 187 Singh v Johnstone (Consent Judgment of Judge K G Smith, 21 October 2022) CONSENT.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 186 Teddy and Friends Ltd v Page [PDF, 177 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 186 Teddy and Friends Ltd v Page (Costs Judgment of Judge B A Corkill, 17 October 2022) COSTS – GUIDELINE SCALE – unreasonable costs settlement offers made by successful party – costs awarded based on guideline scale – costs awarded on filing costs memorandum.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 185 McPherson v Oji Fibre Solutions (NZ) Ltd [PDF, 270 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 185 McPherson v Oji Fibre Solutions (NZ) Ltd (Judgment of Judge B A Corkill, 17 October 2022) APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO REMOVE PROCEEDINGS – proceedings involve similar or related issues to proceedings already before the Court – important legal issue will arise other than incidentally – no compelling reason to decline leave – application granted.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 184 Straayer v Employment Relations Authority [PDF, 329 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 184 Straayer v Employment Relations Authority (Judgment of Judge B A Corkill, 17 October 2022) APPLICATION TO STRIKE OUT JUDICIAL REVIEW PROCEEDINGS - Employment Relations Act contains only one path for judicial review applications - judicial review is only available after Authority has published substantive determination that has been challenged - Authority has not published determination - judicial review cannot succeed - application for strike-out granted.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 183 Butt v Attorney-General [PDF, 372 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 183 Butt v Attorney-General (Judgment of Judge Kathryn Beck, 12 October 2022) SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT – MISREPRESENTATION – CANCELLATION – plaintiff sought to cancel settlement agreement for misrepresentation – defendant made misrepresentation to plaintiff – plaintiff relied on misrepresentation – plaintiff induced by representation to sign agreement – parties did not explicitly or implicitly agree that the truth of the representation was essential – misrepresentation substantially reduced the benefit of the contract to the plaintiff – plaintiff entitled to cancel contract – plaintiff entitled to proceed with claim.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 182 Wright v Southern Cross Healthcare Ltd [PDF, 112 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 182 Wright v Southern Cross Healthcare Ltd (Consent Judgment of Judge Kathryn Beck, 10 October 2022) CONSENT.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 181 NZEC Management Ltd v McKnight [PDF, 141 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 181 NZEC Management Ltd v McKnight (Consent Judgment of Judge Judge Kathryn Beck, 3 October 2022) CONSENT.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 180 Malcolm v The Chief Executive of the Department of Corrections [PDF, 193 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 180 Malcolm v The Chief Executive of the Department of Corrections (Costs Judgment of Judge B A Corkill, 29 September 2022) COSTS – GUIDELINE SCALE – no further step was taken to obtain judgment without appearance – costs awarded with reduction.