| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Wellington |
| Reference No | WA 17/08 |
| Hearing date | 24 Sep 2007 - 6 Nov 2007 (2 days) |
| Determination date | 14 February 2008 |
| Member | J Crichton |
| Representation | D Balfour ; C Chilwell |
| Location | Palmerston North;Auckland |
| Parties | Smith v Dannevirke High School |
| Summary | PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – GOOD FAITH – Earlier determination where parties settled all matters and Authority issued consent order – Applicant claimed respondent procured applicant’s agreement to settle employment relationship problem through dishonest practices or bad faith – Respondent argued applicant’s claims amounted to vexatious litigation – Applicant discovered name reported to Teachers Council (“TC”) – Applicant claimed if had knowledge was to be reported to TC would not have settled or settled under same terms – Respondent argued applicant reported to TC because required when employment terminated in certain circumstances – Applicant claimed “tricked” into settlement when respondent should have known importance of report to TC – Respondent argued statutory obligation to report to TC not negotiable and applicant, as professional teacher, would have known of professional obligations to TC – Respondent further argued report to TC was subject of extensive discussion and notification between parties – Authority found on evidence letter of notification to TC after mediation process unsuccessful – Authority satisfied respondent’s advocate told applicant’s advocate advised TC prior to settlement – Respondent’s advocate’s evidence preferred – Authority did not accept respondent’s argument that applicant knew or ought to have known of statutory obligation to notify TC – Authority found respondent met obligation to advise applicant that TC informed – UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE – Applicant claimed respondent’s observations at school prize giving breached confidentiality provisions of settlement agreement – Authority found respondent’s observations ill advised and breached clause in settlement agreement – Respondent argued applicant also breached settlement agreement by making information available to news media – Authority found both parties breached settlement agreement – Authority did not think penalty approach necessary or sensible – Authority concluded breaches in effect balanced each other out and not activated by bad faith or malice – Application dismissed – Teacher |
| Result | Application dismissed ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Breach of Contract |
| Number of Pages | 11 |
| PDF File Link: | wa 17_08.pdf [pdf 37 KB] |