| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | AA 17/05 |
| Hearing date | 13 Jan 2005 |
| Determination date | 21 January 2005 |
| Member | K J Anderson |
| Representation | S Hood ; G Lloyd |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Singh v The Chief Executive of the Department of Labour |
| Summary | INJUNCTION - Application for interim injunction staying disciplinary proceedings against applicant until pending criminal charges concluded - Applicant charged with four counts of theft relating to money and motor vehicles which allegedly occurred while carrying out duties as employee - Applicant suspended on pay while respondent conducted investigation - At meeting to discuss matters surrounding criminal charges applicant maintained right to silence - Respondent narrowed investigation to use of respondent's vehicle to travel to and from Manukau City and Hamilton, false vehicle running sheet entry and applicant's presence in Manukau City - Photographed by police in Manukau City on day in question - Preliminary view serious misconduct and dismissal an option - Opportunity to provide comment before final decision - Applicant sought injunction - Respondent also wished to investigate applicant's later statement to police that he was attending immigration matter in Auckland that day - On issue of applicant's rights in regard to investigation into conduct relating to use of respondent's vehicle and trust and confidence issues alone Authority would have had difficulty in finding arguable case - Arguable case however in respect of possibility that any dismissal could have prejudicial effect on minds of jurors in criminal trial - Cost of suspension on pay to New Zealand tax payer considered but balance of convenience marginally favoured applicant who would be deprived of income if dismissed - Overall justice of case considered - Respondent entitled to conduct investigation provided questions did not go into areas involving criminal charges - Grave matter to interfere with such entitlement - Not able to conclude was any real danger of injustice occurring in criminal proceedings - Personal grievance procedures available to applicant in event of dismissal - Injunction declined - New Zealand Immigration Service compliance officer |
| Result | Application dismissed ; Costs reserved |
| Statutes | New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 s23(4) |
| Cases Cited | Harris v Courage (Eastern) Ltd [1982] IRLR 509;Melville v Chatham Islands Council [1999] 2 ERNZ 76;Russell v Wanganui City College [1998] 3 ERNZ 1076;Sotheran v Ansett New Zealand Ltd [1999] 1 ERNZ 548;Wellington Road Transport etc IUOW v Fletcher Construction Co Ltd [1982] ACJ 653;Wackrow v Fonterra Co-operative Group Ltd unreported, Shaw J, 10 June 2004, AC 32/04;X v Y Ltd and New Zealand Stock Exchange [1992] 1 ERNZ 863 |
| Number of Pages | 10 |
| PDF File Link: | aa 17_05.pdf [pdf 74 KB] |