| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | [2012] NZERA Auckland 169 |
| Hearing date | 10 May 2012 |
| Determination date | 18 May 2012 |
| Member | E Robinson |
| Representation | V Campbell ; P Cranney |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Affco New Zeland Ltd v New Zealand Meat and Related Trades Unions Inc & Anor |
| Other Parties | New Zealand Council of Trade Unions Te Kauae Kaimahi Inc |
| Summary | PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – GOOD FAITH – Determination of preliminary issue – Second respondent (“CTU”) claimed action against CTU should be struck out - Applicant claimed first respondent (“NZMWU”) had breached implied terms of good faith and CTU had incited, instigated, aided and abetted NZMWU’s breaches – Applicant sought penalty against CTU - Applicant claimed respondent offices and other business subject to “cyber attack” preventing respondent from accessing phone or internet and severely hampering operations – Respondent claimed received in excess of 2,400 unsolicited emails and traced source back to MWU’s website and CTU’s server – Applicant claimed CTU acted on NZMWU’s instructions – Applicant claimed NZMWU failed to consider and respond to applicant’s proposals – Applicant claimed NZMWU made comments and published communications that were misleading and intended to undermine parties’ bargaining – CTU claimed not party to employment relationship in accordance with s4(1A) and s134(2) Employment Relations Act 2000 (“ERA”) – Authority found CTU not union under s4(2) ERA as not registered union – Found not employment relationship between CTU and applicant therefore CTU had not breached good faith provisions under s4(1A) ERA – Found applicant’s claim relating to CTU breaching s4(1A) ERA good faith provisions should be struck out – CTU claimed no employment agreement (“EA”) between applicant and NZMWU – Found applicant’s employees who were NZMWU members had EA with applicant however not contract of service between NZMWU and applicant – Found penalty under s134(2) ERA applicable only where breach of EA – Found applicant’s claim relating to CTU inciting, instigating, aiding and abetting breach of EA should be struck out - Found applicant’s claim relating to penalty against CTU for assisting NZMWU breach of EA should be struck out |
| Result | Application granted ; Orders accordingly ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Practice & Procedure |
| Statutes | ERA s4;ERA s4(1A);ERA s4(1A)(b);ERA s4(2);ERA s4(4)(a);ERA s5;ERA s16;ERA s32;ERA s32(1)(c);ERA s32(1)(d)(iii);ERA s53;ERA Part 4;ERA s134(2) |
| Number of Pages | 7 |
| PDF File Link: | 2012_NZERA_Auckland_169.pdf [pdf 31 KB] |