| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | AA 80/07 |
| Hearing date | 20 Mar 2007 |
| Determination date | 20 March 2007 |
| Member | J Wilson |
| Representation | M Ryan ; R Smith & A Steele |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Eagle Technology Group Ltd v Maskell & Ors |
| Other Parties | Coppins, Trilogy Solutions Ltd |
| Summary | PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Application for removal to Employment Court and urgency - Applicant sought number of injunctions, penalties and damages against respondents for breach of employment agreements – Applicant filed identical application in Employment Court – Court to consider within next few days whether it had appropriate jurisdiction to consider injunctions sought – Appropriate to address question of removal prior to hearing – Nature of application satisfied Authority granting of urgency appropriate – First and second respondents consented to removal – Third respondent did not consent on grounds no complaint before Authority or Court supported it being a party to either proceeding – Important question of law likely to arise other than incidentally – Third respondent’s objection to being party to proceedings best dealt with by Court as part of progression of case – Matter removed to Court |
| Result | Application granted ; Orders accordingly ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Practice & Procedure |
| Statutes | ERA s178;ERA s178(2);ERA s178(2)(a) |
| Cases Cited | Axiom Rolle PRP Valuations Services Ltd v Kapadia (2006) 3 NZELR 390 |
| Number of Pages | 4 |
| PDF File Link: | aa 80_07.pdf [pdf 18 KB] |