Restrictions OK
Jurisdiction Employment Relations Authority - Auckland
Reference No [2015] NZERA Auckland 130
Hearing date 16 Mar 2015
Determination date 08 May 2015
Member V Campbell
Representation P Pau ; P Wicks
Location Auckland
Parties Bhikoo v Stephen Marr Hair Design Newmarket Ltd
Summary UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – Serious Misconduct – Applicant claimed unjustifiably dismissed by respondent - RESTRAINT OF TRADE – Applicant sought declaration restraint of trade clause unenforceable – PENALTY - GOOD FAITH - Applicant sought penalty for respondent’s failure to provide employment agreement (“EA”) and breach of good faith – Salon manager
Abstract AUTHORITY FOUND –UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL: Fair and reasonable employer could have concluded that applicant committed serious misconduct by walking off job, making announcement about intention to set up own salon to other employees and inappropriate use of company credit card. Respondent engaged impartial decision maker, undertook fair investigation and allowed applicant opportunity to comment. Applicant failed to comment so respondent unable to consider explanations. Dismissal justified.RESTRAINT OF TRADE: Clause not contained in EA so no jurisdiction to consider claim.PENALTY- GOOD FAITH: Respondent did not breach good faith obligations. Respondent breached statutory duty by failing to provide EA but applicant should have commenced action earlier. No penalty.
Result Applications dismissed ; Costs reserved
Main Category Personal Grievance
Statutes ERA;ERA s103A(2);ERA s103A(3);ERA s103A(5);ERA s174
Cases Cited Angus v Ports of Auckland Ltd [2011] NZEmpC 160, [2011] ERNZ 466;BDM Grange v Parker [2006] 1 NZLR 353 (HC);Harris v The Warehouse Ltd [2014] NZEmpC 188
Number of Pages 13
PDF File Link: 2015_NZERA_Auckland_130.pdf [pdf 234 KB]