| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | AA 220/05 |
| Hearing date | 17 May 2005 |
| Determination date | 17 June 2005 |
| Member | M Urlich |
| Representation | AR Drake ; L Herzog |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Ernst & Young v Wilson |
| Summary | BREACH OF CONTRACT - Respondent employee received and banked, for his own benefit, three cheques totalling $14,062.50 from client of applicant - Applicant sought return of money with interest and exemplary damages - Respondent alleged fee arrangement" existed under which he was entitled to money - Alleged Authority did not have jurisdiction to look at execution of fee arrangement - Existence or otherwise of alleged fee arrangement did not preclude Authority's investigation - No evidence respondent received authorisation from applicant to approach client to recover fees directly - Respondent inexplicably failed to account to applicant for monies received from client purportedly in satisfaction of debt owed to applicant - Respondent breached terms of employment agreement by putting his own interests above those of his employer and employer's client - Respondent ordered to pay $14,062.50 to applicant with interest of 7% - Respondent took advantage of applicant and client's trust to receive payments without authorisation - Issuing of invoice in name of non-existent company compounded his actions - Exemplary damages awarded - Senior manager" |
| Result | Application granted ; Damages ($14,062.50) ; Exemplary damages ($2,000) ; Costs reserved |
| Number of Pages | 4 |
| PDF File Link: | aa 220_05.pdf [pdf 21 KB] |