Restrictions Includes non-publication order
Jurisdiction Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch
Reference No [2012] NZERA Christchurch 259
Determination date 26 November 2012
Member M B Loftus
Representation K Coulston ; M Guest
Location Christchurch
Parties G v H (a former employee of G's)
Summary PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Application for interim suppression of respondent’s identity – Authority found Authority potentially nullifying effect of another body’s decision would frustrate administration of justice – Application for interim suppression of respondent’s identity granted – Applicant’s identity suppressed on interim basis also – Application for substantive matter to be heard by specific Authority member – Found matter heard earlier by specific Authority member not between parties, for Authority to determine who hears matters and spectre of bias could be raised if inference party may have influenced selection of Authority member – Application for substantive matter to be heard by specific Authority member declined – Application for removal to Employment Court – Found no argument tendered in support of application for removal and no question of law identified – Application for removal declined
Abstract Applicant sought penalties against respondent. Respondent sought interim suppression of respondent’s identity, requested substantive matter be heard by specific Authority member and sought removal of matter to Employment Court. Respondent claimed issues giving rise to applicant’s claim litigated already in another jurisdiction where respondent’s identity suppressed. Respondent claimed specific Authority member heard and decided substantive case between parties earlier.;AUTHORITY FOUND –;PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE: Authority potentially nullifying effect of another body’s decision would frustrate administration of justice. Application for interim suppression of respondent’s identity granted. Applicant’s identity suppressed on interim basis to prevent identification of respondent from earlier decision. Matter heard earlier by specific Authority member not between parties but between applicant and another former employee. Authority to determine who hears matter and inference party may have influenced selection of Authority member could raise spectre of bias. Application for substantive matter to be heard by specific Authority member declined. No argument tendered in support of application for removal, no question of law identified and law relating to penalties well established. Application for removal declined.
Result Application partially granted ; Orders made ; Costs reserved
Main Category Practice & Procedure
Statutes ERA
Cases Cited R v Paterson [1992] 1 NZLR 45
Number of Pages 3
PDF File Link: 2012_NZERA_Christchurch_259.pdf [pdf 90 KB]