Restrictions OK
Jurisdiction Employment Relations Authority - Wellington
Reference No [2017] NZERA Wellington 79
Hearing date 22-Aug-17
Determination date 23 August 2017
Member M Loftus
Representation N Papera (in person) ; J Evans
Location Wellington
Parties Papera v Deluxe Cleaning Services Ltd
Summary UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE – Applicant claimed unjustifiably disadvantaged by respondent’s failure to act in good faith and maintain safe work place by not protecting him from bullying – PENALTY – Applicant sought penalty for respondent’s breach of record of settlement (“ROS”) – COSTS – Respondent sought contribution towards costs – Cleaner
Abstract AUTHORITY FOUND –;UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE: Applicant initially sought to rely on events prior to and settled under the ROS. Insufficient supporting evidence of bullying after settlement entered into. No unjustified disadvantage. PENALTY: Applicant claimed respondent breached three terms of ROS. No credible evidence of alleged breaches. No penalty. COSTS: Less than one day investigation meeting. Appropriate to apply notional daily tariff in absence of contrary argument or objections from applicant. Applicant to pay respondent $1,000 contribution towards costs.
Result Applications dismissed ; Costs in favour of respondent ($1,000)
Main Category Breach of Settlement Agreement
Statutes ERA s149
Cases Cited Fagotti v Acme & Co Ltd [2015] NZEmpC 135;PBO Ltd (Formerly Rush Security Ltd) v Da Cruz [2005] ERNZ 808 (EmpC)
Number of Pages 6
PDF File Link: 2017_NZERA_Wellington_79.pdf [pdf 155 KB]