| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch |
| Reference No | [2013] NZERA Christchurch 226 |
| Hearing date | 11 Apr 2013 |
| Determination date | 01 November 2013 |
| Member | M B Loftus |
| Representation | K COulston ; M Guest |
| Location | Timaru |
| Parties | G v H |
| Summary | PENALTY – Applicant sought penalties for respondent’s breach of good faith and breach of employment agreement – Whether respondent sent letter to former colleague (“Z”) for Z’s use in Employment Court (“EC”) proceedings against applicant – Whether respondent recorded meeting and sent recording to Z for Z’s use in EC proceedings – Whether respondent entitled to access applicant’s computer network after respondent told not required to work out notice period – New Zealand Institute of Chartered Accountants (“Institute”) concluded respondent breached Institute’s rules by passing letter and recording to Z but not with respect to accessing applicant’s computer network – Whether claim precluded because determined already in different jurisdiction – Issue estoppel – Financial controller |
| Abstract | AUTHORITY FOUND –;PENALTY: Authority ordered non-publication of identities of parties and witnesses. Issues raised almost identical to issues determined by Institute. Institute did not consider applicant’s argument wrong hard drive examined for evidence but still no evidence respondent accessed files respondent had no right to access. Institute and Authority both had power to penalise respondent. Unjust and unfair to permit same issue to be litigated afresh. No penalty. |
| Result | Application dismissed ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Penalty |
| Statutes | ERA Second Schedule cl10(1);New Zealand Institute of Chartered Accountants Act 1996 |
| Cases Cited | G v H [2012] NZERA Christchurch 259;Minter Ellison Rudd Watts v Hampton [2012] NZHC 1715 |
| Number of Pages | 6 |
| PDF File Link: | 2013_NZERA_Christchurch_226.pdf [pdf 151 KB] |