| Restrictions | Includes non-publication order |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | AA 409/10 |
| Hearing date | 19 Jul 2010 - 20 Jul 2010 (2 days) |
| Determination date | 13 September 2010 |
| Member | A Dumbleton |
| Representation | W Reid ; W Macphail |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Brake v Grace Team Accounting Ltd |
| Summary | BREACH OF CONTRACT – Applicant claimed given undertaking before entering employment relationship employment would be of long duration – Applicant claimed unjust for respondent to escape from honouring contractual promises by relying on redundancy to dismiss applicant – Respondent claimed when interviewed applicant believed position to be permanent but subsequently discovered had more positions than necessary – Authority found no guarantee position offered to applicant would remain in existence – Found respondent naturally wanted to be hopeful, positive and constructive about future of employment relationship – Found intention genuine and no misrepresentation – Found redundancy not excluded as possible cause for termination and was provided for in employment agreement (“EA”) – Found unlikely respondent represented redundancy not possible but included extensive redundancy provisions in EA – Found applicant induced to enter employment relationship by significantly higher salary offered and change of working environment – Found no misleading or deceptive conduct – UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – Redundancy – Applicant claimed dismissal unjustified – Found applicant’s position surplus to requirements – Found decision to make position redundant based entirely on genuine commercial considerations and not on personal factors – Found respondent unaware of applicant’s serious medical condition – Found some data relied upon in redundancy decision incorrect but not deliberately provided to justify redundancy – Found data accepted and relied on in good faith by respondent – Found applicant fully and properly consulted regarding possibility of redundancy – Found alternatives to redundancy considered and discussed with applicant – Found respondent acted as fair and reasonable employer – Dismissal justified – Order made prohibiting publication of respondent’s financial information and applicant’s medical records – Senior Accountant |
| Result | Applications dismissed ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Personal Grievance |
| Statutes | ERA s4(1A);ERA s103A;ERA s123;ERA s128;ERA s162;Contractual Remedies Act 1979 s6;Contractual Remedies Act 1979 s7;Fair Trading Act 1986 s12 |
| Cases Cited | Aoraki Corporation Ltd v McGavin [1998] ERNZ 601;GN Hale & Sons Ltd v Wellington, Taranaki and Nelson Caretakers etc IUOW [1990] 2 NZILR 1079;Simpsons Farms Ltd v Aberhart [2006] ERNZ 825 |
| Number of Pages | 10 |
| PDF File Link: | aa 409_10.pdf [pdf 32 KB] |