| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch |
| Reference No | CA 221A/10 |
| Hearing date | 17 Dec 2010 |
| Determination date | 23 December 2010 |
| Member | H Doyle |
| Representation | BE Corkran (in person) ; D Appleton |
| Location | Christchurch |
| Parties | Corkran v Thornton as receivers fo Livingspace Properties Ltd (in receivership and liquidation) |
| Summary | ARREARS OF WAGES AND HOLIDAY PAY – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Identity of employer – Applicant claimed owed arrears of holiday pay and four week notice period – Receivers argued had no liability towards applicant and there were three companies on face of employment agreement that could be applicant’s employer – Receivers of company L did not accept applicant employed by L – Receivers of companies H argued applicant employed by L – Applicant claimed advised by receivers of H that employment with H terminated – Subsequently applicant turned up to work for L – Applicant advised no records of employment with L and considered contract was with H – Authority concluded H would not be joined to matter – Respondent also argued Authority did not have jurisdiction to determine whether notice given to applicant unlawful under Receivership Act 1998 – Applicant claimed was told was employed by L – Claimed 100 percent sure employed by L – Authority found H was entity whose incorporation postdated date of commencement of applicant’s employment and employment agreement – Found necessary to consider EA but also important to consider evidence available regarding payment, taxation, and other matters that may on objective analysis support finding of identity of employer – Found difficult in matter to reconcile H as sole employer in EA – However, on objective assessment of evidence applicant employed by L – Found applicant accepted offer of employment with L and not another entity – Authority found did not have jurisdiction regarding potential liability of receivers – Found no employment relationship between receivers and applicant – Orders accordingly |
| Result | Orders accordingly ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Practice & Procedure |
| Statutes | Receivership Act 1998 s32 |
| Cases Cited | ASTE v Chief Executive of Bay of Plenty Polytechnic [2002] ERNZ 491;Colosimo v Parker (2007) 8 NZELC 98;Mehta v Elliott (Labour Inspector) [2003] 1 ERNZ 451;Vector Gas Ltd v Bay of Plenty Energy Ltd [2010] NZSC 5; (2010) 9 NZBLC 102,874; [2010] 2 NZLR 444;Weston v Fraser 2008 5 NZELR 575 |
| Number of Pages | 9 |
| PDF File Link: | ca 221a_10.pdf [pdf 39 KB] |