| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | [2013] NZERA Auckland 188 |
| Hearing date | 1 May 2013 |
| Determination date | 13 May 2013 |
| Member | R Larmer |
| Representation | J Trotman ; H Thompson |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Hollywood v Corporate Restructuring Ltd |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE – UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – Constructive Dismissal – Applicant claimed unjustifiably disadvantaged by verbal abuse and unjustifiably dismissed by respondent – Applicant on maternity leave – Applicant decided to move to Australia – Whether applicant misled respondent – Respondent confronted applicant at home – Alleged breach of fidelity – Alleged breach of trust and confidence - Respondent uplifted company property from applicant’s home – Emotional distress – Failure to agree on mediation date – Chartered accountant |
| Abstract | AUTHORITY FOUND –;UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE – UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL: Applicant under no obligation to inform respondent of decision to move to Australia. Applicant only contractually required to give one month’s notice. Applicant unjustifiably disadvantaged by respondent’s failure to respect applicant’s privacy and to raise employment issues in appropriate forum or in reasonable manner. Applicant unjustifiably disadvantaged by loss of access to personal information when respondent’s property uplifted. Respondent embarked on course of conduct with deliberate and dominant purpose of coercing applicant’s resignation. Manner in which respondent communicated with applicant and content of communications fundamentally undermined trust and confidence inherent in employment relationship. Reasonably foreseeable applicant would resign. Applicant constructively dismissed. Dismissal unjustified. REMEDIES: No contributory conduct. Respondent to pay applicant $20,000 reimbursement of lost wages. $9,000 compensation appropriate. |
| Result | Application granted ; Reimbursement of lost wages ($20,000) ; Compensation for humiliation etc ($9,000) ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Personal Grievance |
| Statutes | ERA s103(1)(b);ERA s103A;ERA s128(2);ERA s 174 |
| Cases Cited | Para Franchising Ltd v Whyte [2002] 2 ERNZ 120;Wellington, Taranaki and Marlborough Clerical etc IUOW v Greenwich (t/a Greenwich and Associates Employment Agency and Complete Fitness Centre) (1983) ERNZ Sel Cas 95 |
| Number of Pages | 17 |
| PDF File Link: | 2013_NZERA_Auckland_188.pdf [pdf 268 KB] |