| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | AA 100/10 |
| Hearing date | 1 Mar 2010 |
| Determination date | 04 March 2010 |
| Member | A Dumbleton |
| Representation | P Chambers ; W Stanton (in person) |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Bird v United Construction Services Ltd (in liquidation) and Anor |
| Other Parties | Stanton |
| Summary | JURISDICTION – Whether employee or independent contractor – First respondent went into liquidation – Authority found applicant’s claims against first respondent could not proceed – Dispute as to service of documents – Authority rejected second respondent’s denial of being served – Second respondent contended applicant not employee of either respondent but contractor to first respondent – Found no contractual relationship between applicant and second respondent – Found claims could not proceed – Found no issue about identity of contracting parties before liquidation – Found issue was nature of contractual relationship – Business records indicted contracting relationship – Applicant given cell phone under account with first respondent – Found first respondent employer – Found unable to make any findings because first respondent in liquidation – Found applicant may be able to present claim to liquidator |
| Result | Orders made ; No order for costs |
| Main Category | Jurisdiction |
| Statutes | Employment Relations Authority Regulations |
| Number of Pages | 5 |
| PDF File Link: | aa 100_10.pdf [pdf 21 KB] |