Restrictions OK
Jurisdiction Employment Relations Authority - Auckland
Reference No AA 72/06
Hearing date 3 Mar 2006
Determination date 10 March 2006
Member V Campbell
Representation M Hammond ; D France
Location Auckland
Parties Cutriss v Carter Holt Harvey Ltd
Other Parties (Cuttriss)
Summary PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - Application for removal to Employment Court - Dispute over whether particular retirement policy was term of applicant's employment which respondent unable to unilaterally delete - Retirement plan only applicable to those employed at particular site - Applicant sought removal on basis that important question of law likely to arise in matter other than incidentally - Alleged question of law was that irrespective of how certain terms might be described in employment agreement or policy documentation there were specific terms that could never be altered unilaterally - Respondent opposed removal - Authority found that applicant was looking for statement from Court as to when remunerative-based policies became so fundamental to employment agreement that could not be deleted unilaterally - Not aware of any Court cases which considered this question as other cases did not concern provisions relating to remunerative terms - Removal ordered
Result Application granted ; Matter removed to Court ; No order for costs
Statutes ERA s178;ERA s178(2);ERA s178(2)(a)
Cases Cited Auckland Electric Power Board v Auckland Provincial District Local Authorities Officers IUOW Inc [1994] 1 ERNZ 168 ; [1994] 2 NZLR 415;Auckland Shop etc Employees etc IUOW v Woolworths (NZ) Ltd [1985] ACJ 963; [1985] 2 NZLR 372;Carter Holt Harvey Ltd v Pawson [1998] 2 ERNZ 1;Hanlon v International Educational Foundation (NZ) Inc [1995] 1 ERNZ 1;McAlister v Air New Zealand Ltd unreported, Shaw J, 11 May 2005, AC 22/05;Waghorn v Canterbury Regional Council unreported, Palmer J, 8 September 1994, CEC 33/94
Number of Pages 3
PDF File Link: aa 72_06.pdf [pdf 13 KB]