Restrictions OK
Jurisdiction Employment Relations Authority - Auckland
Reference No AA 46/06
Hearing date 14 Dec 2005
Determination date 21 February 2006
Member J Scott
Representation H Bowbyes (in person) ; D Law
Location Auckland
Parties Bowbyes v Vango Ltd
Summary JURISDICTION - Whether applicant was employee - No written agreement - Applicant alleged parties agreed he would have seven percent shareholding in respondent which would rise to 50 percent when business was operational - Alleged respondent also employed him as marketing manager and he worked 40 hours per week but was never remunerated as promised - Respondent alleged applicant was given small shareholding in return for marketing assistance, and contracted to provide designs for vans at agreed rate of $500 per van - Credibility finding in favour of respondent - Email from applicant to respondent showed applicant was working as minority shareholder with no expectation of remuneration - Intention of parties was that they would go into business as partners - Applicant worked from home in evenings and invoiced respondent through his own business - Using control, integration and fundamental tests applicant was engaged on design work under oral contract for services - Applicant not employee
Result Application dismissed ; Costs reserved
Statutes ERA s6
Cases Cited Bryson v Three Foot Six Ltd [2003] 1 ERNZ 581;Bryson v Three Foot Six Ltd [2005] 1 ERNZ 372 ; [2005] 3 NZLR 721;Curlew v Harvey Norman Stores (NZ) Pty Ltd [2002] 1 ERNZ 114;Koia v Carlyon Holdings Ltd [2001] ERNZ 585
Number of Pages 5
PDF File Link: aa 46_06.pdf [pdf 33 KB]