| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | AA 356/06 |
| Hearing date | 21 Nov 2006 |
| Determination date | 24 November 2006 |
| Member | L Robinson |
| Representation | R Harrison ; S Wilson |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Heath v Auckland City Council |
| Summary | INJUNCTION - Interim reinstatement - Applicant summarily dismissed for serious misconduct - Apparent inaccuracies in transcriptions of meeting notes raised issues about respondent's inquiry - Arguable case for unjustified dismissal - Applicant had not secured new employment and claimed financial hardship - Authority accepted applicant entitled to hold himself in readiness for reinstatement - Replacement employee appointed but respondent put on notice almost immediately that applicant intended to seek interim reinstatement - Authority unmoved by concern other employees could resign - Some degree of disruption inevitable with type of application and reinstatement premised upon finding of unlawfulness - Significant that substantive investigation to occur in less than four weeks, but final determination likely to be delayed by end of year vacation period - No alternative remedy for applicant - Balance of convenience favoured applicant - Primacy accorded by Parliament to reinstatement relevant - Overall justice with applicant - Interim reinstatement granted subject to conditions - Authority took into account new appointment made, and short time to substantive investigation - Applicant not required to perform work duties - Respondent not required to allow him to perform duties - Marina manager |
| Result | Application granted ; Interim reinstatement ordered on conditions ; Orders accordingly ; Costs reserved |
| Statutes | ERA s103A;ERA s127;ERA s127(5) |
| Number of Pages | 8 |
| PDF File Link: | aa 356_06.pdf [pdf 42 KB] |