| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | AA 228/09 |
| Hearing date | 8 Jul 2009 |
| Determination date | 13 July 2009 |
| Member | A Dumbleton |
| Representation | M Ryan ; G Stone |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Longley v TBA Communications Ltd |
| Summary | INJUNCTION – Application for interim reinstatement – Applicant dismissed twice within 12 months – Respondent argued applicant’s inadequate performance reason for both dismissals – Applicant raised personal grievance regarding first dismissal and sought interim reinstatement – Applicant returned to work after parties reached agreement at mediation – Authority noted applicant’s personal grievance regarding first dismissal not fully resolved – Applicant’s second dismissal seven weeks after reinstated to respondent – Applicant sought reinstatement pending determination of second dismissal grievance – Authority found arguable case in relation to both dismissals – Authority found balance of convenience favoured applicant – Found no logistical reason why applicant could not be reinstated until substantive claim heard – Found availability of other remedies able to substantially repair any financial disadvantage to applicant – Found overall justice favoured respondent – Found mutual loss of trust and confidence likely to undermine return to productive employment relationship - Interim reinstatement declined |
| Result | Application dismissed ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Injunction |
| Statutes | ERA s127;ERA s101C;ERA s125 |
| Cases Cited | Trotter v Telecom Corporation of New Zealand Ltd [1993] 2 ERNZ 659 |
| Number of Pages | 8 |
| PDF File Link: | aa 228_09.pdf [pdf 29 KB] |