| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch |
| Reference No | CA 233/10 |
| Determination date | 15 December 2010 |
| Member | J Crichton |
| Representation | S Zindel ; P Kiely |
| Location | Christchurch |
| Parties | Doran v Crest Commercial Cleaning Ltd |
| Summary | PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - Application for removal to Employment Court (“EC”) - Applicant employed as cleaner - Applicant employed by company (“Y”) to clean premises belonging to another company (“X”) - X ceased contractual relationship with Y and engaged respondent’s services - Applicant claimed, pursuant to Part 6A Employment Relations Act 2000 (“ERA”), entitled to continuity of employment and that respondent ought to have maintained his employment - Claimed as respondent did not was unjustifiably dismissed - Respondent claimed applicant made election to transfer too late and as had already assembled team unable to find position for applicant - Respondent sought removal of matter to EC - Respondent claimed five important questions of law arose other than incidentally - Firstly, meaning of ‘reasonable opportunity’ in s69G(1)(a) ERA - Secondly, meaning of ‘sufficient notice’ in s69G(3) ERA - Thirdly, whether applicant provided with ‘reasonable opportunity’ to exercise right to make election under s69G(1)(a) ERA - Fourthly, whether applicant’s employer provided with ‘sufficient notice’ under s69G(3) ERA - Fifthly, whether applicant’s conduct amounted to election to transfer to respondent under s69I ERA - Respondent claimed if application granted would be first case to test interpretation of section and would have significance for employment law generally - Claimed high likelihood matter would be challenged regardless of outcome - Claimed in interests of justice application be granted - Authority satisfied were important questions of law likely to arise other than incidentally - Found was case where Authority ought to exercise discretion to remove - Found applicant did not oppose application - Application granted - Matter removed to EC - Cleaner |
| Result | Application granted ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Practice & Procedure |
| Statutes | ERA s69G;ERA s178;ERA s178(2)(a);ERA s178(2)(d);ERA Part 6A |
| Cases Cited | Hanlon v International Educational Foundation (NZ) Inc [1995] 1 ERNZ 1;NZ Amalgamated Engineering, Printing & Manufacturing Union Inc v Carter Holt Harvey Ltd [2002] 1 ERNZ 74 |
| Number of Pages | 4 |
| PDF File Link: | ca 233_10.pdf [pdf 19 KB] |