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

3630 items matching your search terms

  3. [2024] NZEmpC 238 Preece v Synlait Milk Ltd [PDF, 224 KB]

    [2024] NZEmpC 238 Preece v Synlait Milk Ltd (judgment of Judge Holden, 2 December 2024) PERSONAL GRIEVANCE – 90 DAYS – VACCINATION MANDATE – employer implemented vaccination mandate policy – employee complained – parties disagree on when grievances were raised – not every complaint or criticism will constitute a grievance – whether the employee intended to raise a grievance is not determinative – one email within the 90-day period was sufficient to raise a disadvantage grievance in respect of the vaccination policy – other communications were insufficient or sufficient but out of time – no grievance raised within time for unjustifiable dismissal – Employment Relations Authority to deal with the surviving unjustifiable disadvantage grievance
  5. [2024] NZEmpC 235 Postal Workers Union of Aotearoa Inc v NZ Post Ltd [PDF, 205 KB]

    [2024] NZEmpC 235 Postal Workers Union of Aotearoa Inc v NZ Post Ltd (Interlocutory judgment of Judges KG Smith 29 November 2024) EMPLOYMENT STATUS - STAY – unsuccessful application for stay of proceeding pending judgment of Supreme Court in another case – proceeding at advanced stage – question whether SC might revisit tests for employment status in Rasier Operation BV case, with implications for this case – element of speculation  about possibility of Supreme Court overturning Bryson v Three Foot Six Ltd – substantial delay for union if stay granted – not just to delay proceeding - application for stay dismissed
  6. [2024] NZEmpC 234 Bowen v National Australia Bank [PDF, 295 KB]

    [2024] NZEmpC 234 Bowen v National Australia Bank (Judgment of Judge K G Smith 29 November 2024) MEANING OF PROCEDURE – MEANING OF JURISDICTION – CHALLENGE – NATURAL JUSTICE – BIAS – the policy of the Act is to prevent disruption of the Authority’s investigations – the principles of natural justice include a rule against bias – decisions involving the principles of natural justice are procedural decisions – decisions involving the principles of natural justice are not jurisdictional decisions for the purposes of s 179(5) – decisions involving natural justice cannot be challenged – no substantive and irreversible impact if challenge cannot be pursued
  14. [2024] NZEmpC 227 The Vice Chancellor of Lincoln University v Cheng [PDF, 237 KB]

    [2024] NZEmpC 227 The Vice Chancellor of Lincoln University v Cheng [(Judgment of Chief Judge Inglis, 22 November 2024) INTERIM REINSTATEMENT – strongly arguable case of unjustifiable dismissal – serious question to be tried in relation to claim of permanent reinstatement – balance of convenience favours interim reinstatement – international recognition of the importance of worker dignity points away from money being a substitute for a job
  16. [2024] NZEmpC 225 Al-Bustanji v Corrections Assoc of New Zealand Inc [PDF, 205 KB]

    [2024] NZEmpC 225 Al-Bustanji v Corrections Assoc of New Zealand Inc (Interlocutory judgment (No 3) of Judge Beck, 22 November 2024) DISCLOSURE – VERIFICATION ORDERS – mutual applications for verification orders in judicial review proceedings – documents sought by respondent not relevant to proceedings – applicants failed to challenge notice of objection – verification order made in respect of some documents sought by applicants
  17. [2024] NZEmpC 224 Kongbang v Lotus Touch Ltd [PDF, 192 KB]

    [2024] NZEmpC 224 Kongbang v Lotus Touch Ltd (Interlocutory judgment of Judge Beck, 22 November 2024) PROTEST TO JURISDICTION – LEAVE TO RECOVER MONEY – application for orders setting aside appearance protesting jurisdiction – proceedings involve claim of secondary liability against director of employer – leave from Authority or Court required to recover money – liability only arises on leave being granted – employee followed proper process in seeking leave to make recovery – Court has jurisdiction to make orders sought.
  19. [2024] NZEmpC 222  Courage & Ors v The Attorney-General & Ors   [PDF, 264 KB]

    [2024] NZEmpC 222  Courage & Ors v The Attorney-General & Ors  (Judgment (No 2) of Chief Judge Inglis, 21 November 2024) EMPLOYER IDENTITY - Overseeing Shepherd exercised ultimate control over employees - Overseeing Shepherd was employer – there may be other joint or additional employers but that issue cannot be determined at this stage (lack of clarity because of complex operational structure; companies removed from Companies Register after claim filed but before determined).
  21. [2024] NZEmpC 220 Very Nice Productions Limited v Ormond [PDF, 200 KB]

    [2024] NZEmpC 220 Very Nice Productions Limited v Ormond (Interlocutory Judgment of Judge King, 19 November 2024) SECURITY FOR COSTS – plaintiff acknowledges impecuniosity – merits of case uncertain – plaintiff’s financial circumstances not caused by defendant – no evidence that an order for security would impact plaintiff’s ability to pursue challenge – no evidence of bad faith – balance of convenience favours security for costs – full sum of likely costs could bring proceedings to end – security of $10,000 ordered
  22. [2024] NZEmpC 219 Oliver v Biggs [PDF, 228 KB]

    [2024] NZEmpC 219 Oliver v Biggs (Interlocutory judgment of Judge Corkill, 19 November 2024) APPLICATION TO AMEND PLEADINGS – COMPLIANCE ORDERS – SANCTIONS – plaintiff originally sought sanction of imprisonment for breach of compliance order – defendant paid outstanding sums – plaintiff sought to amend statement of claim to seek fine rather than imprisonment – some difficulties with sanction sought in the circumstances – amendment to pleadings permitted.