| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch |
| Reference No | CA 59/06 |
| Hearing date | 27 Feb 2006 - 2 Mar 2006 (4 days) |
| Determination date | 03 May 2006 |
| Member | P Cheyne |
| Representation | W Van Harselaar ; P Churchman |
| Location | Christchurch |
| Parties | Heffernan v Estate of Patrick David Heffernan |
| Summary | ARREARS OF WAGES - Applicant alleged employed by his father (PH) and owed wages in respect of work performed over three years - Applicant continued to work on farm for four months after father's death - Whether applicant an employee - Claims arose under both Employment Contracts Act 1991 and Employment Relations Act 2000 - To preserve rights of appeal, and by agreement, one consolidated hearing conducted in form of adjudication hearing before Employment Tribunal - Authority appointed by Chief of Authority to exercise jurisdiction of Employment Tribunal - Significant dispute over many facts - Partially executed memorandum of consent stated applicant was not barred from bringing claim for wages against estate to agreed maximum of $120,000 - Applicant alleged he could claim up to $120,000 net with respondent responsible for tax - Authority found deed limited maximum payable by estate to $120,000 including any tax - Deed of family arrangement executed 17 months prior to date applicant claimed he started work stated that any service provided by applicant was pursuant to labour-only contract for services (not an employment contract) - Applicant produced photocopies of two employment agreements he claimed he entered with PH - Bona fides of agreements contested and Authority found applicant's evidence around circumstances of their making and absence of originals unsatisfactory - Photocopied agreements could not be relied on as proof of employment contract between applicant and PH - Applicant had assisted PH with some farming work - Evidence that he received some payment for casual farm work - Inference that applicant was paid each time he and PH agreed work would be performed sat comfortably with family history - Shortly after PH's death applicant was asked to detail any outstanding matter between him and his father - No mention was made of unpaid wages - Evidence did not support applicant's claim for arrears of wages up to date of father's death - Common law position that death of either party terminates contract of employment - Applicant's claim against estate for period after PH's death appeared to be on basis of arrangement to continue prior employment - As Authority had not upheld existence of prior employment agreement except for occasional casual work, applicant's claim for arrears of wages for work performed under an employment agreement after his father's death also failed - Farm worker |
| Result | Application dismissed ; Costs reserved |
| Statutes | ERA s252;Family Protection Act 1955 |
| Cases Cited | Macgillivray v Jones [1992] 2 ERNZ 382 |
| Number of Pages | 11 |
| PDF File Link: | ca 59_06.pdf [pdf 77 KB] |