| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | AA 56/06 |
| Determination date | 01 March 2006 |
| Member | J Wilson |
| Representation | M McFadden, D Organ ; P Muir |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Robertson and Ors v Carter Holt Harvey Ltd t/a Oxygen Business Systems |
| Other Parties | McCallum, Hagen |
| Summary | PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - Application to reopen investigation - Authority had determined that claim not raised within time - Also determined applicants were not entitled to payments sought - At first reading was possible to gain impression that conclusion was reached without applicants being given full and well exercised opportunity to be heard - Applicants believed they should have been given opportunity to bring further evidence and submissions in support of claim - However, lack of such opportunity by itself did not constitute miscarriage of justice - All evidence before Authority suggested that applicants were not eligible to receive payments - To reopen investigation would subject parties to additional expense and was little likelihood that further investigation and argument would result in different outcome - No miscarriage of justice - Application to reopen dismissed |
| Result | Application dismissed ; Costs reserved |
| Statutes | ERA s114(1);ERA Second Schedule cl4 |
| Cases Cited | Dorset v Chemcolour Industries (NZ) Ltd unreported, A Dumbleton, 8 April 2004, AA 117/04;New Zealand Waterfront Workers' Union v Ports of Auckland Ltd [1994] 1 ERNZ 604;Wellington Area Health Board v Wellington Hotel etc IUOW [1992] 2 ERNZ 466 ; [1992] 3 NZLR 658 |
| Number of Pages | 5 |
| PDF File Link: | aa 56_06.pdf [pdf 25 KB] |