| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | AA 418/08 |
| Determination date | 09 December 2008 |
| Member | Y S Oldfield |
| Representation | L Turner ; M Ryan |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Roberts v Carat New Zealand Ltd |
| Summary | INTERIM INJUNCTION – Application for interim reinstatement – Applicant dismissed for redundancy – Applicant claims redundancy was “sham” – “Heated altercation” occurred between applicant and senior manager – Applicant received written warning after altercation – Two days later applicant made redundant – Applicant claimed no prior warning given – Applicant’s performance never questioned – Respondent claimed redundancy due to business reasons – Decision to disestablish applicant’s position influenced by failed attempt to acquire new business – Timing of redundancy and warning “coincidence” – Authority found threshold for arguable case met – Found arguable redundancy was “sham” – Found balance of convenience favoured applicant – Authority did not accept respondent’s argument applicant’s role no longer performed – Did not accept respondent’s argument trust and confidence too damaged for interim restatement – Found alternative remedies inadequate – Found overall justice favoured applicant – Found no financial difficulties would be suffered by respondent if interim reinstatement granted – Applicant willing to enter into period of garden leave – Interim reinstatement granted on garden leave – Communications Planning Manager |
| Result | Application granted ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Injunction |
| Number of Pages | 7 |
| PDF File Link: | aa 418_08.pdf [pdf 28 KB] |