| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Wellington |
| Reference No | WA 25/09 |
| Hearing date | 26 Feb 2009 |
| Determination date | 09 March 2009 |
| Member | D Asher |
| Representation | A Knowsley, F McGeorge ; T Kennedy |
| Location | Wellington |
| Parties | Hughes v Primary Care Development Solutions Ltd |
| Summary | JURISDICTION - Whether employee or independent contractor - Respondent argued intended applicant be engaged as contractor under contract of service that applicant refused to sign - Respondent argued employment agreements (EA") not true nature of employment relationship but produced to facilitate applicant obtaining bank loan - Applicant claimed EA's accurately reflected employment status - Authority found applicant's terms of employment not recorded in any agreements agreed upon by parties - Authority satisfied given control exercised by respondent and discussions with manager before commencing employment, applicant at all times an employee - Found applicant fully integrated into respondent's affairs - Authority satisfied real nature of relationship was contract of services - Found signed EA evidence of respondent's agreement to contract of services - Authority observed significant costs already incurred by applicant in preliminary matters should be considered by parties for substantive determination" |
| Result | Application granted ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Jurisdiction |
| Statutes | ERA s6(2);ERA s6(3);ERA s114;ERA s114(5) |
| Cases Cited | Bryson v Three Foot Six Ltd [2003] 1 ERNZ 581 |
| Number of Pages | 9 |
| PDF File Link: | wa 25_09.pdf [pdf 39 KB] |