| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | [2017] NZERA Auckland 99 |
| Determination date | 04 April 2017 |
| Member | R Arthur |
| Representation | S Marx (in person) ; L Cole |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Marx v Southern Cross Campus Board of Trustees |
| Summary | PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - Application for recusal - Applicant alleged preliminary determination accused her of lying and was biased in favour of respondent |
| Abstract | AUTHORITY FOUND -;PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE: Applicant’s disagreement with preliminary determination not grounds for recusal, especially considering challenged not upheld by Employment Court. Deciding jurisdictional issue did not demonstrate bias. Preliminary determination assessed applicant had not met evidential burden and did not amount to accusation that applicant was a liar. Authority cannot fairly provide one party with advice on how to better their case. Delay in investigation resulted from applicant’s challenge and application for rehearing. Application for recusal dismissed. |
| Result | Application dismissed ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Practice & Procedure |
| Statutes | Bracewell v Richmond Services Ltd [2015] NZEmpC 45;Nisha v LSG Sky Chefs New Zealand Ltd [2014] NZEmpC 160;Owen v Chief Executive of the Department of Corrections [2015] NZEmpC 201;Re JRL; Ex parte CJL [1986] HCA 39;Stiassny v Siemer [2013] NZHC 154;Saxmere Company Ltd v Wool Board Disestablishment Company Ltd [2009] NZSC 72, [2010] 1 NZLR 35 |
| Number of Pages | 10 |
| PDF File Link: | 2017_NZERA_Auckland_99.pdf [pdf 265 KB] |