| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | [2017] NZERA Auckland 81 |
| Determination date | 23 March 2017 |
| Member | A Fitzgibbon |
| Representation | M Urlich ; S Bennett |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Labour Inspector v Raw n Fresh Ltd |
| Summary | PENALTY – Applicant sought penalty for premiums sought by respondent – COSTS – Applicant sought contribution to costs |
| Abstract | AUTHORITY FOUND –PENALTY: One breach. Breach serious. Employee vulnerable migrant worker and significantly impacted. Respondent initially hindered applicant’s investigation. Employee never actually paid premium. No financial evidence regarding respondent’s ability to pay. $12,000 penalty appropriate.COSTS: No investigation meeting. Respondent to pay applicant $350 contribution to costs. |
| Result | Application granted ; Penalty ($12,000)(payable to applicant) ; Costs in favour of applicant ($350) ; Disbursements in favour of applicant ($71.56)(filing fee) |
| Main Category | Penalty |
| Statutes | ERA s133A ; ERA s135 ; ERA s136(2) ; ERA s254 ; ERA Schedule 1AA cl3(1) ; Employment Relations Amendment Act 2016 ; Wages Protection Act 1983 s12A(1) ; Wages Protection Act 1983 s13(1)(b) ; Wages Protection Act 1983 s13(2) |
| Cases Cited | Borsboom v Preet Pvt Ltd [2016] NZEmpC 143 ; Labour Inspector v Raw n Fresh Ltd [2017] NZERA Auckland 23 ; Lin z Zhou [2012] NZERA Auckland 43 ; O’Shea v Pekanga o Te Awa Farms Ltd [2016] NZEmpC 19 ; Tan v Yang [2014] NZEmpC 65, [2014] ERNZ 733 ; Tian v South Pacific Ltd [2012] NZERA Auckland 367 ; Zhou v Harbit International Ltd [2012] NZERA Auckland 404 |
| Number of Pages | 10 |
| PDF File Link: | 2017_NZERA_Auckland_81.pdf [pdf 221 KB] |