Restrictions OK
Jurisdiction Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch
Reference No [2014] NZERA Christchurch 86
Determination date 12 June 2014
Member M B Loftus
Representation P Cranney ; P Swarbrick, T Oldfield
Parties Barnes and Ors v Coles Group New Zealand Holdings Ltd
Other Parties Gardner, Foote
Summary PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - Applicants sought removal of matter to Employment Court (EC") on grounds important questions of law likely to arise and in all circumstances matter should be determined by EC - Applicants claimed respondent offered non-union employees benefits constituting unlawful preference and breach of collective employment agreement"
Abstract AUTHORITY FOUND -;PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE: EC had explained interpretation of section 9 Employment Relations Act 2000 in previous case and present claim required inquiry into disputed facts. Issues of motive and remedies available for breach of section 9 arose incidentally and not important questions of law. Number of discretionary considerations mitigated against removal. Application for removal declined.
Result Application dismissed ; Costs reserved
Main Category Practice & Procedure
Statutes ERA s9;ERA s9(1);ERA Part 10;ERA s143(f);ERA s143(fa);ERA s143(g);ERA s178(2);ERA s178(2)(a);ERA s178(2)(d)
Cases Cited Eastern Bay Independent Industrial Workers Union Inc v ABB Ltd [2008] ERNZ 537;National Union of Public Employees (Inc) v Asure New Zealand Ltd [2004] 2 ERNZ 487;NZ Amalgamated Engineering, Printing & Manufacturing Union Inc v Carter Holt Harvey Ltd [2002] 1 ERNZ 74
Number of Pages 4
PDF File Link: 2014_NZERA_Christchurch_86.pdf [pdf 143 KB]