| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch |
| Reference No | CA 120/04 |
| Hearing date | 7 Sep 2004 |
| Determination date | 01 October 2004 |
| Member | P Cheyne |
| Representation | D Flemming ; N McPhail |
| Location | Christchurch |
| Parties | Blair v Lane Walker Rudkin Manufacturing Ltd |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL - Applicant on long-term leave due to illness - Respondent inquired as to when applicant would return - Meeting to discuss issues - Applicant dismissed - Was shocked and stunned - Letter did not sufficiently convey respondent's view of seriousness of issue - Applicant not told by respondent termination was possibility - Dismissal unjustified - Accepted respondent could have made justifiable decision to dismiss but did not |
| Result | Application granted ; Compensation for humiliation etc ($12,000) ; Costs reserved |
| Cases Cited | Barry v Wilson Parking New Zealand (1992) Ltd [1998] 1 ERNZ 545;Canterbury Clerical Workers IUOW v Andrews and Beaven Ltd [1983] ACJ 875;Hoskin v Coastal Fish Supplies Ltd [1985] ACJ 124;McKechnie Pacific (NZ) Ltd v Clemow [1998] 3 ERNZ 245;Motor Machinists Ltd v Craig [1996] 2 ERNZ 585;Paykel Ltd v Morton [1994] 1 ERNZ 875 |
| Number of Pages | 6 |
| PDF File Link: | ca 120_04.pdf [pdf 39 KB] |