Restrictions OK
Jurisdiction Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch
Reference No [2013] NZERA Christchurch 34
Hearing date 24 Oct 2012
Determination date 14 February 2013
Member C Hickey
Representation A Oberndorfer ; T Jackson
Location Timaru
Parties Spence v Lake Ohau Holdings Ltd
Summary UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE - UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – Redundancy - Applicant claimed unjustifiably disadvantaged by being grabbed and pushed by respondent and unjustifiably dismissed by respondent – Physical assault - Failure to leave work premises - Police involvement - COUNTERCLAIM – BREACH OF CONTRACT - Respondent claimed applicant breached employment agreement resulting in business closing early and financial loss to respondent - Cook
Abstract AUTHORITY FOUND –;UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE - UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL: Applicant unjustifiably disadvantaged by respondent’s hostile physical conduct. Respondent had genuine business reasons for making applicant redundant. Process used by respondent in deciding to dismiss applicant unfair. Respondent’s decision to send applicant home and prevent applicant from working out notice period unfair. Dismissal unjustified. REMEDIES: No contributory conduct. $7,500 compensation appropriate.;COUNTERCLAIM – BREACH OF CONTRACT: Applicant did not breach employment agreement and not liable to reimburse respondent for financial loss.
Result Application granted; Compensation for humiliation etc ($7,500); Costs reserved
Main Category Personal Grievance
Statutes ERA s4(1A)(c);ERA s103A;ERA s103A(3);ERA s103A(5);ERA s124
Cases Cited Angus v Ports of Auckland Ltd (2011) 9 NZELC 94,015;G N Hale & Sons Ltd v Wellington etc Caretakers etc IUOW (1990) ERNZ Sel Cas 843; [1991] 1 NZLR 151;Goodman Fielder Wattie Agri-Products Ltd v Gibson [1995] 2 ERNZ 323;Poverty Bay Electric Power Board v Atkinson [1992] 3 ERNZ 413;Simpsons Farms Ltd v Aberhart [2006] ERNZ 825
Number of Pages 16
PDF File Link: 2013_NZERA_Christchurch_34.pdf [pdf 223 KB]