| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | [2012] NZERA Auckland 181 |
| Hearing date | 30 May 2012 |
| Determination date | 30 May 2012 |
| Member | R Larmer |
| Representation | S Langton ; P Wicks |
| Parties | PFP Management Ltd v Liang |
| Summary | PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - Application to vary consent order - Respondent sought to vary deadline for information to be provided to applicant - Authority found applicant likely to be prejudiced by extension of deadline - Application to vary consent order declined |
| Abstract | Respondent bound by consent order requiring respondent to deliver information to applicant by deadline. Within one day of deadline respondent sought order varying date information to be provided. Respondent claimed in China for personal and family reasons. Respondent admitted providing confidential information gained during course of respondent's employment to others. Applicant claimed respondent's unilateral decision to extend stay in China evidence of deliberate intention not to comply with existing consent orders.;AUTHORITY FOUND -;PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE: Applicant likely to be prejudiced by extension of deadline because of greater risk applicant's confidential information would be misused. No explanation given by respondent for lateness of application. No steps taken by respondent to minimise any prejudice to applicant caused by proposed extension of deadline. Application to vary consent order declined. |
| Result | Application dismissed; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Practice & Procedure |
| Cases Cited | PFP Management Ltd v Liang [2012] NZERA Auckland 172 |
| Number of Pages | 4 |
| PDF File Link: | 2012_NZERA_Auckland_181.pdf [pdf 72 KB] |