| Restrictions | Includes non-publication order |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | [2017] NZERA Auckland 4 |
| Hearing date | 10 Oct 2016 and 11 Oct 2016 (2 days) |
| Determination date | 10 January 2017 |
| Member | R Arthur |
| Representation | S Lapthorne ; S Langton |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | James v Sherson Willis Ltd |
| Summary | JURISDICTION – Whether applicant employee or independent contractor |
| Abstract | AUTHORITY FOUND –JURISDICTION: Inherent inequality between parties relevant to determining real nature of relationship. Insufficient evidence to indicate common intention between parties. Applicant not in business on own account. Applicant exclusively engaged in work full-time for respondent. Applicant employed by respondent. Parties directed to mediation. |
| Result | Application granted ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Jurisdiction |
| Statutes | ERA s3(a)(ii) ; ERA s6(1)(a) ; ERA s6(2) ; ERA s6(3)(b) ; ERA s157(2)(d) ; ERA s159 ; ERA s174E |
| Cases Cited | Brunton v Garden City Helicopters Ltd [2011] NZEmpC 29, [2011] ERNZ 504 ; Bryson v Three Foot Six Ltd (No 2) [2005] NZSC 34, [2005] 3 NZLR 721 ; Chief of Defence Force v Ross-Taylor [2010] NZEmpC 22, [2010] ERNZ 61 ; Fagotti v Acme Ltd [2015] NZEmpC 135, (2015) NZELR 1 ; Franix Construction Ltd v Tozer [2014] NZEmpC 159, [2014] ERNZ 347 ; Koia v Carlyon Holdings Ltd [2001] ERNZ 585 (EmpC) ; Massey v Crown Life Insurance Co [1978] 2 All ER 576 ; PBO Ltd (formerly Rush Security Ltd) v Da Cruz [2005] ERNZ 808 (EmpC) ; Singh v Eric James & Associates Ltd [2010] NZEmpC 1 ; Telecom South Ltd v Post Office Union Inc [1992] 1 NZLR 275 (CA) |
| Number of Pages | 20 |
| PDF File Link: | 2017_NZERA_Auckland_4_amended.pdf [pdf 252 KB] |