| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | [2012] NZERA Auckland 77 |
| Determination date | 29 February 2012 |
| Member | D King |
| Representation | J Chen (in person) ; R Towner |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Chen v New Zealand Sugar Company Ltd |
| Summary | RAISING PERSONAL GRIEVANCE – Applicant sought leave to raise grievance out of time – Applicant claimed unjustifiably dismissed and disadvantaged by respondent – Respondent claimed application should be dismissed because of principle of estoppel per rem judicatum and for being frivolous and vexatious – Applicant claimed exceptional circumstances that respondent did not provide response to grievance within requisite period, did not lodge statement in reply within proper timeframe and did not seek leave of Authority to file statement in reply – Applicant claimed if respondent had taken proper steps would have been able to assess whether had separate grievance for constructive dismissal – Authority found applicant’s argument had no merit as applicant made clear not pursuing unjustified dismissal claim – Found abundantly clear applicant sought to relitigate disadvantage grievance and barred from doing so – Found no exceptional circumstances and would not be just to grant leave even if there were due to considerable period of time elapsed since dismissal – Leave to raise grievance out of time declined |
| Result | Application dismissed ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Raising PG |
| Statutes | ERA s114(4);ERA Second Schedule cl12A |
| Cases Cited | Chen v New Zealand Sugar Company Ltd unreported, A Dumbleton, 3 June 2009, AA177/09;Chen v New Zealand Sugar Company Ltd [2010] NZEmpC 54;Chen v New Zealand Sugar Company Ltd [2010] NZCA 477;Shiels v Blakeley [1986] 2 NZLR 262 |
| Number of Pages | 3 |
| PDF File Link: | 2012_NZERA_Auckland_77.pdf [pdf 14 KB] |