| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | [2011] NZERA Auckland 513 |
| Determination date | 02 December 2011 |
| Member | R A Monaghan |
| Representation | P Skelton ; D Mackinnon |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | QBE Insurance (International) Ltd v Anderson |
| Summary | PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Joint application for removal to Employment Court (“EC”) – Parties sought removal on grounds important questions of law likely to arise – Applicant (QBE Insurance (International) Limited – employer) claimed respondent (Mr Anderson – employee) breached employment agreement and good faith obligations – Applicant claimed respondent committed applicant to underwrite extended warranty and consumer protection insurance facility that company (“M”) wished to offer customers and had no authority to do so – Applicant claimed respondent failed to ensure details of M’s extended warranty policy were entered into applicant’s computer system or reported in usual way – Applicant claimed respondent did not take all reasonable and prudent steps to ensure applicant received premium payments from insurance broker (“H”) in relation to M’s extended warranty policy – Applicant claimed respondent took steps to cover trail – Applicant claimed loss in excess of $1.5 million as consequence of alleged breaches of respondent’s employment duties – Respondent denied breaches – Respondent claimed applicant failed to transfer ownership of shares held on respondent’s behalf in employee share plan – Parties claimed important questions of law likely to arise were: whether respondent’s actions resulted in applicant being committed to and placed ‘on risk’ in relation to extended warranty facility that H sought to arrange for M; scope of implied contractual duty of employee to exercise skill and care; scope of s4 Employment Relations Act 2000; and whether subsequent receivership and liquidation of H broke chain of causation between respondent’s alleged breach of contract and loss suffered – Parties claimed insurance law relevant in identifying whether respondent’s actions or inactions created legally binding and enforceable contract of insurance, legal significance that broker received premiums, and whether applicant prevented from disclaiming policies for non-payment of premiums – Respondent claimed applicant’s loss not caused by respondent’s actions or inactions but by failure of broker to account for premium income obtained prior to when H placed in receivership – Parties claimed determining quantum likely to be complicated – Parties claimed significant disputes of fact – Matter to be removed – General Manager |
| Result | Application granted ; No order for costs |
| Main Category | Practice & Procedure |
| Statutes | ERA s4;ERA s178 |
| Number of Pages | 4 |
| PDF File Link: | 2011_NZERA_Auckland_513.pdf [pdf 16 KB] |