Judgments of note 2017

From time to time the Court decides cases that have general importance for practitioners of employment law as well as for the particular parties. These will include some judgments of the full Court and others examining and applying new law.

2017

[2017] NZEmpC 71 Stormont v Peddle Thorp Aitken Ltd [PDF, 296 KB] (Judgment of Judge Christina Inglis, 6 June 2017) BONUS – CONTRACT – REDUNDANCY - HURT AND HUMILIATION – bonus to be calculated according to terms of contract – no estoppel existed – employer breach of good faith in relation to bonus and redundancy – penalty imposed – penalty quantum surveyed – special damages awarded – meaning of “humiliation, loss of dignity an injury to feelings” considered – compensation quantum surveyed – unpaid bonus, special damages and lost remuneration ordered with holiday pay and interest - $25,000 compensation.

[2017] NZEmpC 70 Edminstin v Sanford Ltd (Judgment of Chief Judge G L Colgan, 6 June 2017) INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY – CONTRACT – ownership of “marks” in identifying oyster beds – traditional custom and practice and its place in law considered – “marks” belong to skippers – not overridden by employment agreement – distinguished from JP Morgan – history of “marks” surveyed – ownership of “marks” exclusive to plaintiff - breach of  property rights not proven.

 

[2017] NZEmpC 69 8i Corporation v Marino [PDF, 156 KB] (Judgment of Judge Christina Inglis, 6 June 2017) SECTION 149 – PENALTY CLAUSE – whether term of mediator-signed agreement can be challenged subsequently on grounds of unlawfulness, or whether such scrutiny is precluded by s 149(3) – “enforcement purposes” interpreted - Court may look into lawfulness of a term on public policy grounds.

[2017] NZEmpC 56 Nel v ASB Bank Ltd [PDF, 179 KB] (Interlocutory Judgment of Judge B A Corkill, 16 May 2017) DISCOVERY – relevance and scope considered – categories of document listed - challenge to defendant’s objections successful – inspection of documents ordered.

[2017] NZEmpC 55 Kaipara District Council v McKerchar (Judgment of Chief Judge G L Colgan, 12 May 2017) SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT – STRIKE-OUT APPLICATIONS – JURISDICTION – law on compromise agreements considered and applied - law on strike-out – contra proferentum  – time-frame for penalty action lapsed – defendant’s claim struck out for want of jurisdiction – plaintiff’s claim precluded by terms of settlement agreement – struck out. 

[2017] NZEmpC 47 Singh v Trustees of the Wellington Rudolf Steiner Kindergarten Trust [PDF, 104 KB] (Judgment of Judge M E Perkins, 8 May 2017) SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT– whether terms of agreement precluded raising of employment problem – at point of sign-off, plaintiff withdrew agreement – whether parties bound to agreement absent mediator sign-off  - equitable estoppel applies  - plaintiff precluded from pursuing claims – challenge dismissed.

[2017] NZEmpC 41 Cronin-Lampe v The Board of Trustees of Melville High School [PDF, 211 KB] (Interlocutory Judgment of Judge M E Perkins, 26 April 2017) APPLICATIONS FOR LEAVE TO RAISE PERSONAL GRIEVANCES OUT OF TIME AND TO BRING PROCEEDINGS – amended statement of claim to be accepted subject to further amendment - common law proceedings under s 4(7) Limitation Act 1950 for bodily injury – reasonable discovery – mistake of law –prejudice – leave granted on basis that delay occasioned by mistake of law and other reasonable cause – other action to be deferred to hearing.

[2017] NZEmpC 40 XYZ v ABC [PDF, 271 KB] (Judgment of Judge Christina Inglis, 12 April 2017) APPLICATIONS FOR INTERIM REINSTATEMENT, INTERIM NON-PUBLICATION – principles for interim reinstatement applied – application declined – recent case law considered – stringent approach required – interim non-publication granted.

[2017] NZEmpC 39 ALA v ITE [PDF, 317 KB] (Judgment of Judge B A Corkill, 12 April 2017) BREACH OF COMPLIANCE ORDER – SANCTIONS – whether defendant failed to comply with compliance order – how to assess public interest justification – principles of comity applied – one breach found – fine of $7,500 – permanent non-publication orders made.

[2017] NZEmpC 35 Ahuja v Labour Inspector, Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment [PDF, 247 KB] (Interlocutory Judgment (No 2) of Chief Judge G L Colgan, 30 March 2017) CHALLENGE  – AUTHORITY AWARDED PENALTY OF ITS OWN MOTION – REPRESENTATION - whether Authority should appear when not a party to plaintiff’s challenge – whether independent counsel to be appointed – Labour Inspector not appropriate defendant in every case but appropriate  where party to challenge and willing participant – costs to be met out of public funds.

[2017] NZEmpC 30 Lumsden v Skycity Management Ltd [PDF, 222 KB] (Judgment of Judge Christina Inglis, 14, March 2017) BREACHES OF s 149 AGREEMENT – confidential terms agreed  - no conflict between s 149 and s 238 – defendant breached non-disparagement clause – penalties sought for breach – recent case law considered – penalty of $7,500 ordered, with 75% to plaintiff.

[2017] NZEmpC 23 Domingo v Suon and Heng (t-a Town and Country Food) [PDF, 178 KB] (Judgment of Judge Christina Inglis, 7 March 2017) COMPLIANCE ORDER – defendant failed to comply with Authority’s compliance order – whether Employment Court has jurisdiction to impose a sanction under s 140(6) where enforcement may be sought in District Court – set-off claim prohibited by minimum code statutes – jurisdiction found – defendant fined $11,000 – part-payment of  $6,600 to plaintiff – plaintiff entitled to costs.

[2017] NZEmpC 15 Spotless Facility Services NZ Ltd v Mackay [PDF, 143 KB] (Judgment (No 2) of Judge B A Corkill, 22 February 2017) DISADVANTAGE GRIEVANCE – s 122 considered – adequacy of investigation of stress issues – lack of response to raising of concerns – unjustified disadvantage under s 122 found – compensation of $2000 awarded.

[2017] NZEmpC 12 Stormont v Peddle Thorp Aitken Ltd [PDF, 193 KB] (Interlocutory Judgment of Judge Christina Inglis, 16 February 2017) APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO RESPOND OUT OF TIME – whether plaintiff obliged to file a reply to defendant’s positive defence – whether leave should be granted to extend the time to file reply – application of High Court Rules to positive defences – High Court Rules held to apply – overall interests of justice considered – application to extend time for filing reply to defendant’s positive defence granted.

[2017] NZEmpC 11 Matsuoka v LSG Sky Chefs New Zealand Ltd [PDF, 173 KB] (Interlocutory Judgment of Judge M E Perkins in respect of 1) Application for wasted costs order; 2) first amended application for further and better discovery in respect of electronic documents etc, 15 February 2017) APPLICATION FOR WASTED COSTS ORDER – APPLICATION FOR FURTHER AND BETTER DISCOVERY – prior hearing concerning outstanding applications adjourned due to amended statement of claim – wasted costs could have been avoided by informing opposing counsel and Court of amended pleadings – $10,000 wasted costs ordered against plaintiff –case law and factors relevant to further discovery considered – existence of further documents speculative – discovery process disproportionate to claim – plaintiff’s further discovery application declined – further particular discovery of certain documents ordered.

[2017] NZEmpC 10 Xtreme Dining t/a Think Steel v Dewar [PDF, 107 KB] (Costs Judgment of the Full Court, 14 February 2017) COSTS – test case – Calderbank offer – GST considered – actual costs appropriate – plaintiff to pay costs of $25.031.16

[2017] NZEmpC 6 Lyttelton Port Company Ltd v Maritime Union of New Zealand Inc [PDF, 183 KB] (Judgment of Judge B A Corkill, 31 January 2017) INTERIM INJUNCTION - SECRET BALLOT– whether ballot taken by union complied with s 82A – was general or specific motion required? – Parliamentary background to s 83A considered – dicta on “arguable case” and “onus” – more than speculative evidence required – application unsuccessful.

[2017] NZEmpC 4 Marx v Southern Cross Campus Board of Trustees [PDF, 137 KB] (Judgment of Judge Christina Inglis, 27 January 2017) APPLICATION FOR REHEARING – application filed out of time – application could reasonably have been made sooner – grounds for application considered – relevant principles considered – grounds for a rehearing not established – application declined.

This page was last updated: