| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | [2016] NZERA Auckland 123 |
| Determination date | 22 April 2016 |
| Member | Tania Tetitaha |
| Representation | D Lohr (in person) ; P McBride |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Lohr v Accident Compensation Corporation |
| Summary | JURISDICTION – Whether applicant employee or independent contractor – Chiropractor |
| Abstract | AUTHORITY FOUND –;JURISDICTION: No written employment agreement. Applicant paid per patient. Applicant determined patients and treatment. Respondent did not check on applicant’s work. Applicant used company to invoice and process payments from respondent. Respondent does not employ treatment providers like applicant. Applicant running own business. Applicant independent contractor. No jurisdiction. |
| Result | Application dismissed ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Jurisdiction |
| Statutes | ERA s6(1);ERA s6(2);ERA s6(3);ERA s161(1);Accident Compensation Act 2001 |
| Cases Cited | Bryson v Three Foot Six Ltd [2003] 1 ERNZ 581 (EmpC);Bryson v Three Foot Six Ltd (No 2) [2005] NZSC 34, [2005] 3 NZLR 721;Bank voor Handel en Scheepvaart NV v Slatford (No 2) [1953] 1 QB 248 (CA);Curlew v Harvey Norman Stores (NZ) Pty Ltd [2002] 1 ERNZ 114 (EmpC) |
| Number of Pages | 4 |
| PDF File Link: | 2016_NZERA_Auckland_123.pdf [pdf 102 KB] |