| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch |
| Reference No | CA 56/09 |
| Determination date | 30 April 2009 |
| Member | J Crichton |
| Representation | M Elliott ; B Nimmo, W Annan |
| Location | Christchurch |
| Parties | Persico v Commissioner of Police |
| Summary | COMPLIANCE ORDER – Applicant sought compliance with mediated settlement agreement – Applicant claimed withdrawal of previously granted authority to provide surveillance training breached agreement – Respondent claimed agreement dealt with concerns regarding surveillance unit managed by applicant, therefore agreement’s purpose to exclude applicant from providing surveillance training – Complaints arose regarding applicant’s management of Police surveillance unit – Employment relationship problems resolved by mediated settlement agreement – District Commander approved applicant’s application to assist in surveillance training – Police National Headquarters subsequently overturned approval - Authority found not proper exercise of discretion to grant compliance order when evidence insufficient and respondent had limited opportunity to respond to claims – Found based on untested limited evidence, respondent did not breach mediated settlement agreement – Compliance order declined – Police Officer |
| Result | Application dismissed; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Compliance Order |
| Number of Pages | 6 |
| PDF File Link: | ca 56_09.pdf [pdf 24 KB] |