| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | [2013] NZERA Auckland 101 |
| Hearing date | 19 Sep 2012 |
| Determination date | 25 March 2013 |
| Member | K J Anderson |
| Representation | W Reid, R Rolston ; C Andersen |
| Location | Tauranga |
| Parties | Healy v DBLShot Ltd |
| Summary | JURISDICTION - UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL - Poor performance - Applicant claimed unjustifiably dismissed by respondent - 90 day trial period - Loud conversations heard by customers - Over ordering stock - Food quality not up to respondent's standards - Delay in food production - Whether respondent breached good faith obligations - Chef |
| Abstract | AUTHORITY FOUND -;JURISDICTION - UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL: 90 day trial period valid. No Jurisdiction. Arguable breach of good faith. Respondent's actions not deliberate, serious or sustained nor did they intend to undermine employment relationship. No penalty. |
| Result | Application dismissed; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Jurisdiction |
| Statutes | ERA s4A - ERA s4A(a) - ERA s4A(b) - ERA s(1A)(b) - ERA s67A - ERA s67B(1) - ERA s67B(1) - ERA s67B(2) - ERA s67B(4) - ERA s67B(5) |
| Cases Cited | Smith v Stokes Valley Pharmacy (2009) Ltd [2010] ERNZ 253 |
| Number of Pages | 12 |
| PDF File Link: | 2013_NZERA_Auckland_101.pdf [pdf 190 KB] |