| Summary |
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Identity of employer – Respondent argued individual employment agreement (“IEA”) named Tycab Australia Pty Ltd (“Tycab”) as employer – Tycab and respondent groups under same Australian parent company – Applicant signed IEA but claimed did not notice Tycab named as employer – IEA not signed or executed by employer – Applicant claimed employed to manage respondent company, primary workplace was respondent’s offices, respondent employed all other staff, respondent paid salary, payslips headed with respondent’s name and IEA provided for holidays to be governed by New Zealand (“NZ”) legislation – No submissions for respondent regarding identity of employer – Authority found Tycab employer – Found letter to applicant during employment not notice that employment to transfer to third party, but merely that reporting relationship to change - JURISDICTION – No express selection by parties of relevant law – Found that by implication, parties selected NZ law to govern employment relationship - IEA used NZ legal terminology, selected NZ holidays legislation and no features of IEA indicated governed by any other law – Agreement entered into in NZ – No subsequent conduct of parties indicated intention to apply Australian law – NZ also forum conveniens – Respondent had commercial presence in NZ and no inconvenience to respondent which would outweigh matter being heard in its natural forum of NZ |