Restrictions OK
Jurisdiction Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch
Reference No [2015] NZERA Christchurch 4
Determination date 13 January 2015
Member Christine Hickey
Representation J Ames (in person) ; P Churchman QC
Parties Ames v West Coast Primary Health Organisation
Summary COUNTERCLAIM - PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - Application to strike out applicant's claim - Applicant dismissed under valid 90 day trial period provision - Applicant reframed claim to allege respondent breached duty of good faith in employment agreement and that applicant unjustifiably disadvantaged - Primary mental health practitioner / counsellor
Abstract AUTHORITY FOUND -;COUNTERCLAIM - PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE: Applicant self-represented and believed genuinely that had been treated wrongly. Applicant's claims not so entirely misconceived as to be frivolous. Applicant's claims could not currently be dismissed as vexatious. Application dismissed. Authority cautioned that applicant's breach of contract and unjustified disadvantage claims could not relate to dismissal or process leading to dismissal.
Result Application dismissed ; No order for costs
Main Category Practice & Procedure
Statutes ERA;ERA s4;ERA s4(2);ERA s4(2)(a);ERA s67A;ERA s67B;ERA s128;ERA s157;ERA s159;ERA s159A;ERA s161;ERA Second Schedule cl12A
Cases Cited Castle v Luxottica Retail NZ Ltd [2014] NZERA Auckland 17;Creser v Tourist Hotel Corp of New Zealand [1990] 1 NZILR 1055;Hayden v Wellington Free Ambulance Service [2002] 1 ERNZ 399;Shaskey v Chief Executive of Manukau Institute of Technology [2012] NZERA Auckland 86
Number of Pages 11
PDF File Link: 2015_NZERA_Christchurch_4.pdf [pdf 250 KB]