| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch |
| Reference No | CA 106/05 |
| Hearing date | 27 Feb 2005 - 16 Jun 2005 (2 days) |
| Determination date | 04 August 2005 |
| Member | P Cheyne |
| Representation | S Page ; B McDonald |
| Location | Christchurch |
| Parties | Webley v Ramsley t/a Millennium 3 Marine |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL - Serious misconduct - Applicant employee and director of respondent - Covert video surveillance of test purchase organised by respondent indicated applicant retained $100 from transaction - Respondent's representative alleged at disciplinary meeting applicant admitted to taking $100 from test buy and other money on five or six occasions totalling between $500 and $1,000 - Applicant alleged he only admitted to keeping $100 and did not offer explanation he gave in evidence (that $100 represented reimbursement of expenses) - During adjournment directors requested that representative dismiss applicant for dishonesty - Directors believed applicant responsible for $30,000 in losses - Failure to give applicant opportunity to speak directly with directors who were decision makers - Applicant could have been able to satisfy directors' suspicions - No full and fair investigation - Unjustified dismissal - Remedies - Contributory conduct - Even on best view of matter applicant not entitled to any remedy - Claims for reimbursement of expenses incurred as director not within Authority's jurisdiction |
| Result | Application granted ; Costs reserved |
| Cases Cited | NZ (with exceptions) Food Processing etc IUOW v Unilever NZ Ltd [1990] 1 NZILR 35;Quinn v Bank of New Zealand [1991] 1 ERNZ 1060 |
| Number of Pages | 5 |
| PDF File Link: | ca 106_05.pdf [pdf 26 KB] |