| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | AA 429/08 |
| Hearing date | 11 Nov 2008 |
| Determination date | 19 December 2008 |
| Member | R A Monaghan |
| Representation | L Kidson (Applicant in person) ; C Davis, C Jones |
| Location | Hamilton |
| Parties | Kidson v C & C (2002) Ltd |
| Summary | JURISDICTION – Whether applicant was person intending to work – Applicant claimed employment agreement (“EA”) offered but did not begin work due to unjustified dismissal – Respondent claimed discussions limited to possibility of employment – Authority found discussions did not proceed beyond exploratory – Found parties had two meetings then applicant performed demonstration – Conflict in evidence – Found respondent expressed interest in offering applicant position in future – Found applicant given standard EA – Found discussions regarding EA’s content informal and exploratory – Found no completed EA given to applicant for her acceptance – No offer of employment made – Acknowledged respondent’s destruction of EA made applicant’s case difficult – No offer and acceptance – No jurisdiction – Beauty Therapist |
| Result | Application dismissed ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Jurisdiction |
| Statutes | ERA s5;ERA s6 |
| Number of Pages | 9 |
| PDF File Link: | aa 429_08.pdf [pdf 31 KB] |