| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch |
| Reference No | CA 148/06 |
| Hearing date | 31 Jan 2006 |
| Determination date | 12 October 2006 |
| Member | H Doyle |
| Representation | C Isherwood (in person) ; D Kilpatrick |
| Location | Christchurch |
| Parties | Isherwood v Apex Car Rentals Ltd |
| Summary | COMPLIANCE ORDER - Applicant sought compliance with Record of Settlement - Respondent claimed complied with settlement - Settlement clause provided once amounts, including salary paid, no further payments due - Applicant claimed salary" definition wider than ordinary salary and included additional holiday and lieu entitlements - Amount owed unclear in settlement - Respondent sent copies of settlement to applicant to sign along with "without prejudice" letter - Letter stated would receive three days salary -Series of without prejudice communications regarding settling matter - Without prejudice protection continued to attach to such communications after settlement of an employment relationship problem - However, consideration of letter necessary to determine whether agreement reached - Authority risked being misled on amount to be paid under clause - Terms of settlement clearly accepted - Matter not one of interpretation - Letter clear about payment and sent before applicant signed settlement - Respondent entitled, in absence of rejection, counter offer, or other response, to rely on settlement on basis of payments in letter - Payment of additional entitlements not provided for in letter - Respondent paid three days salary - Terms of settlement complied with - Not entitled to compliance order - PENALTY - Counterclaim - Respondent alleged applicant in breach of good faith by claiming on settled matter and that claim misled Authority - Exemplary damages, penalties and full solicitor client costs initially sought - Damages no longer sought - Issue whether duty of good faith in s4(4) Employment Relations Act 2000 applied to matter - No submissions heard and no finding made on issue since applicant claimed did not know of letter - Unlikely would have found breach warranting penalty - All remaining terms of settlement prohibited from publication" |
| Result | Application dismissed ; Orders accordingly ; Costs reserved |
| Statutes | ERA s4(1);ERA s4(4);ERA s149 |
| Number of Pages | 4 |
| PDF File Link: | ca 148_06.pdf [pdf 69 KB] |