| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | [2017] NZERA Auckland 318 |
| Hearing date | 10-Oct-17 |
| Determination date | 10 October 2017 |
| Member | T Tetitaha |
| Representation | M Naidoo (in person) ; S Nand (in person) |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Naidoo v Nand |
| Summary | JURISDICTION – Whether applicant employee or independent contractor – Carpenter |
| Abstract | AUTHORITY FOUND –;JURISDICTION: No employment agreement. Respondent did not supervise or control applicants work. Applicant was not an essential part of respondent’s business. No set hourly rate rather staged payments irrespective of hours worked. Applicant paid own taxes. Applicant took contracting jobs elsewhere. Applicant in business on own account. Applicant independent contractor. No jurisdiction. |
| Result | Application dismissed ; Costs lie where they fall |
| Main Category | Jurisdiction |
| Statutes | ERA s6(1);ERA s6(2);ERA s6(3) |
| Cases Cited | Bank voor Handel en Sheepvaart NV v Slatford (No2) [1953] 1 QB 248 (CA);Bryson v Three foot Six Ltd [2003] 1 ERNZ 581 (EmpC);Curlew v Harvey Norman Stores (NZ) Pty Ltd [2002] 1 ERNZ 114 (EmpC) |
| Number of Pages | 4 |
| PDF File Link: | 2017_NZERA_Auckland_318.pdf [pdf 86 KB] |