| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | [2018] NZERA Auckland 119 |
| Hearing date | 11-Apr-18 |
| Determination date | 17 April 2018 |
| Member | E Robinson |
| Representation | V Maangi (in person) ; W Macphail |
| Location | Tauranga |
| Parties | Maangi v Whistler Orchards Ltd |
| Summary | COMPLIANCE ORDER – Applicant sought compliance with Record of Settlement (“ROS”) –PENALTY – Applicant sought penalty for respondents failure to comply – COUNTERCLAIM – PENALTY – Respondent sought penalty for applicant’s failure to comply |
| Abstract | AUTHORITY FOUND –;PENALTY: Respondent breached clause 8 of ROS by not paying the second tranche of money due to applicant. Respondent did not deliberately breach ROS. Genuine misunderstanding of what was agreed. Respondent would have financial difficulty to pay penalty and applicant contributed to the circumstances which led to breach. $300 penalty appropriate. COMPLIANCE ORDER: Respondent ordered to pay $2,000 to applicant to comply clause 8. Compliance ordered. COUNTERCLAIM – PENALTY: Applicant breached three clauses of ROS. Breaches committed considered deliberate. Applicant failed to fulfil requirements of ROS even when given a month to clean property. Applicant would not have difficulty to pay penalty. Appropriate to impose a penalty to act as a deterrent to others. $6,000 penalty appropriate. |
| Result | Partially granted ; Orders made ; Penalty ($300)(Payable to Crown) ; Penalty ($6,000)($1,000)(Payable to Crown) ($5,000)(Payable to Respondent) ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Compliance Order |
| Statutes | ERA s3(a)(v);ERA s133A;ERA s149;ERA s149(4);ERA s157 |
| Cases Cited | Borsboom v Preet PVT Ltd [2016] NZEmpC 143 |
| Number of Pages | 12 |
| PDF File Link: | 2018_NZERA_Auckland_119.pdf [pdf 195 KB] |