| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch |
| Reference No | CA 22/09 |
| Hearing date | 19 Feb 2009 |
| Determination date | 26 February 2009 |
| Member | J Crichton |
| Representation | J Goldstein ; S Dalzell |
| Location | Christchurch |
| Parties | Louwman v Airways Corporation of New Zealand Ltd |
| Summary | INTERIM INJUNCTION – Application for interim reinstatement – Applicant sought interim reinstatement following summary dismissal for serious misconduct – Applicant claimed arguable case of pre-determination, unfair procedure and breach of company policy – Respondent claimed no arguable case due to proper investigation – Authority found arguable whether appropriate procedures used – Applicant claimed balance of convenience in their favour – Claimed unable to find alternative employment due to age and unique skills – Claimed financial hardship suffered and damages inadequate – Respondent claimed balance in their favour – Claimed safety primary concern in airplane industry and difficulties between applicant and co-workers jeopardise safety – Found no financial hardship suffered due to short duration of substantive hearing – Found damages adequate – Found balance favoured respondent – Applicant claimed overall justice in their favour because real likelihood unable to secure similar position due to monopolistic nature of respondent’s business – Respondent claimed overall justice favoured status quo due to safety concerns – Found overall justice favoured respondent – Found garden leave unnecessary when duration of hearing short – Reinstatement declined – Technician |
| Result | Application dismissed ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Injunction |
| Statutes | ERA s3;ERA s127(4) |
| Number of Pages | 10 |
| PDF File Link: | ca 22_09.pdf [pdf 34 KB] |