| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | [2012] NZERA Auckland 308 |
| Determination date | 06 September 2012 |
| Member | R Larmer |
| Representation | P McGuire ; M Dew |
| Parties | Hillman v SKL8 Ltd |
| Summary | JURISDICTION – Determination of preliminary matter – Respondent claimed Authority lacked jurisdiction to consider applicant’s claim for loss of shares in respondent or to assess loss of shares on ‘fair value’ basis – Authority found jurisdiction to award value of shares as compensation for lost benefit if such loss would not have occurred but for unjustified dismissal – Found Authority had wide jurisdiction to determine how any lost benefits to be assessed – Found no jurisdiction for Authority to determine shareholder disputes between applicant and fellow shareholder – Projects manager |
| Abstract | Applicant employed by respondent as projects manager. Respondent claimed Authority lacked jurisdiction to consider applicant’s claim for loss of shares in respondent or to assess loss of shares on ‘fair value’ basis. Parties entered shareholders agreement providing applicant to be shareholder and director of respondent but applicant agreed to transfer all shares to fellow shareholder (“K”) for no consideration if applicant left respondent within two year period. Applicant resigned within two year period and transferred shares to K for no consideration. Applicant claimed constructively dismissed by respondent and sought value of shares as compensation for lost benefit. Respondent claimed matter shareholder claim arising solely under shareholders agreement.;AUTHORITY FOUND –;JURISDICTION: No dispute Authority had jurisdiction to hear applicant’s constructive dismissal claim. Authority had jurisdiction to award value of shares as compensation for lost benefit if such loss would not have occurred but for unjustified dismissal. Authority had wide jurisdiction to determine how any lost benefits to be assessed. Fact that applicant claimed alleged loss of shares should be valued on ‘fair value’ basis as per shareholders agreement did not preclude Authority’s jurisdiction to determine how compensation to be awarded. No jurisdiction for Authority to determine shareholder disputes between applicant and K. |
| Result | Application partially granted; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Jurisdiction |
| Statutes | ECA;ECA s40(1)(c)(ii);LRA;LRA s227(c)(ii) |
| Cases Cited | New Zealand Clerical Workers Union Inc v Walker Corp Ltd unreported, Colgan J, 12 March 1996, CEC7/96;Smith v Practical Plastics Ltd [1998] 1 ERNZ 323;Walker Corp Ltd v O’Sullivan [1996] 2 ERNZ 513 |
| Number of Pages | 8 |
| PDF File Link: | 2012_NZERA_Auckland_308.pdf [pdf 229 KB] |