Restrictions OK
Jurisdiction Employment Relations Authority - Auckland
Reference No AA 212/07
Hearing date 9 Jul 2007
Determination date 19 July 2007
Member R Arthur
Representation C Rowe ; B Edwards
Location Auckland
Parties Belich v Rusty Pelican Ltd
Summary COMPLIANCE ORDER - Applicant awarded lost wages and compensation in earlier determination - Respondent placed in receivership two weeks after investigation meeting and before determination issued - Receiver of respondent advised only some of lost wages award preferential, with rest of claim unsecured - Matter dealt with urgently on papers Applicant challenged Receiver's analysis - Declaration and compliance order sought regarding decision - Applicant claimed Companies Act 1993 (CA") provisions should not override Authority's order for lost wages - Given application arose out of employment relationship problem, Authority clearly had jurisdiction to determine claim - Essential issue whether approach taken by Receiver correct - Whether order for lost wages subject to preferential claims regime of CA - Schedule 7 cl2(bb) of CA expressly limited extent Authority and Courts could give claims for wages greater or lesser preference than other creditors - Approach correct as Schedule limited wage or salary preference claims to amounts earned in four months before receivership began - No compliance order needed - Respondent's director appeared to have misled Authority about prospect and imminence of receivership - However, actions did not affect outcome of application"
Result Application declined ; No order for costs
Main Category Practice & Procedure
Statutes Companies Act 1993;Companies Act 1993 Schedule 7;Companies Act 1993 Schedule 7 cl2(bb);Companies Act 1993 Schedule 7 cl2(a);ERA s123(1)(b);ERA s128(3);ERA s127(2);ERA s161;ERA Schedule 2 cl1(b);Receiverships Act 1993
Cases Cited Belich v Rusty Pelican Ltd unreported, R Arthur, 29 March 2007, AA 97/07
Number of Pages 5
PDF File Link: aa 212_07.pdf [pdf 23 KB]