| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | [2017] NZERA Auckland 158 |
| Determination date | 29 May 2017 |
| Member | N Craig |
| Representation | A Drake, E Strom ; A Sharp |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Calder v Home Direct Ltd |
| Summary | PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Applicant sought removal of the matter to Employment Court (“EC”) on grounds important question of law likely to arise and matter of such nature and urgency that in the public interest for matter to be removed – General Retail Manager |
| Abstract | AUTHORITY FOUND –;PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE: Sufficient guidance from EC on question of whether employer can withdraw notice of termination already available. No important question of law likely to arise. Not urgent or in public interest to remove the matter. Application for removal dismissed. |
| Result | Application dismissed ; No order for costs |
| Main Category | Practice & Procedure |
| Statutes | ERA s4(1)(a) ; ERA s4(1A)(c)(i) ; ERA s4(1A)(c)(ii) ; ERA s178 ; ERA s178(2) ; ERA s178(2)(a) ; ERA s178(2)(b) ; ERA s178(2)(d) |
| Cases Cited | Auckland District Health Board v X (No 2) [2005] ERNZ 551 (EmpC);Brown v New Zealand Tourism Board [2000] 2 ERNZ 43 (EmpC);Hall v Dionex Pty Ltd [2013] NZEmpC 27;Hanlon v International Foundation (NZ) Inc [1995] 1 ERNZ 1 (EmpC);Malaysia Airline System BHD (New Zealand) Ltd v Malone [2003] 1 ERNZ 494 (EmpC);Pacifica Fishing (Christchurch) Ltd v Buckingham [1999] 2 ERNZ 621 (EmpC);Rankin v Attorney-General [2001] ERNZ 476 (EmpC) |
| Number of Pages | 6 |
| PDF File Link: | 2017_NZERA_Auckland_158.pdf [pdf 103 KB] |