Search results

Results 9821-9830 of 21097

  • Toh v Lincoln Park Markerts Ltd t/a The Mighty Dollar Shop

    A Fitzgibbon [Employment Relations Authority - Auckland]

    Summary:
    COSTS - Unsuccessful personal grievance claim – One day investigation meeting – Respondent sought $6,037 contribution towards costs – Authority found appropriate to increase notional daily tariff to reflect applicant’s…
    Result:
    Costs in favour of respondent ($4,000)

  • Cherrington v Mercury Bay Funeral Services Ltd

    E Robinson [Employment Relations Authority - Auckland]

    Summary:
    COMPLIANCE ORDER – Applicant sought compliance with parties’ settlement agreement - Whether applicant breached confidentiality clause - Respondent suspended payments to applicant
    Result:
    Application granted; Compliance ordered; Disbursements in favour of applicant ($71.56)(filing fee); No order for costs

  • Tasker v Momentum Brands (NZ) Ltd

    G J Wood [Employment Relations Authority - Wellington]

    Summary:
    UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – Redundancy – Applicant claimed unjustifiably dismissed by respondent – Applicant claimed camouflage restructure or performance dismissal – Respondent kept restructuring of business confidential for commercial reasons –…
    Result:
    Application granted ; Reimbursement of lost wages ($3,115) ; Compensation for humiliation etc ($8,000) ; Costs reserved

  • Smith v Craig's Men's Hairdressers (2010) Ltd

    D Appleton [Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch]

    Summary:
    COSTS - Successful personal grievance claim – Less than one day investigation meeting – Applicant sought $3,500 contribution towards costs – Authority found no unusual aspects to case or conduct…
    Result:
    Costs in favour of applicant ($1,750)

  • RCG Ltd v Bercich

    D Appleton [Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch]

    Summary:
    PENALTY – Applicant sought penalty for respondent’s breaches of employment agreement and good faith – Respondent sought to take benefit of applicant’s management agreement with client – Previous Authority determination…
    Result:
    Application granted ; Penalty ($6,000)(payable to Crown) ; Costs reserved

  • Leith v Hyslop Blair Transport Ltd

    M B Loftus [Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch]

    Summary:
    UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – Serious Misconduct – Applicant claimed unjustifiably dismissed by respondent – Respondent claimed applicant justifiably dismissed due to concerns about applicant’s ability to perform duties safely after conviction…
    Result:
    Applications dismissed ; Costs reserved

  • Nova Energy Ltd v Mitchell and Ors

    A Dumbleton [Employment Relations Authority - Auckland]

    Summary:
    CONSENT ORDER – Parties reached agreement on confidentiality of documents – Terms of agreement to be orders of Authority
    Result:
    Consent order granted; Orders accordingly; No order for costs

  • Peters v Eru Phillips t/a KCE Catering Equipment Supplies

    R A Monaghan [Employment Relations Authority - Auckland]

    Summary:
    COMPLIANCE ORDER – Applicant sought compliance with previous Authority determination – No appearance for respondent
    Result:
    Application granted ; Compliance ordered; No order for costs; Disbursements in favour of applicant ($71.56)(filing fee)

  • Horton Media Ltd v Tither

    R A Monaghan [Employment Relations Authority - Auckland]

    Summary:
    BREACH OF CONTRACT – RECOVERY OF MONIES – Applicant sought damages for loss incurred by respondent’s appropriation of applicant’s property without consent – Authority found commonly understood that salary included…
    Result:
    Application granted (breach of contract – recovery of monies) ; Damages ($721,994.34) ; Interest (5%) ; Applications dismissed (penalty)(counterclaim – unjustified disadvantage)(counterclaim – arrears of wages)(counterclaim – penalty) ; Costs reserved

  • Amalgamated Workers' Union of New Zealand Inc v Counties Manukau District Health Board

    A Fitzgibbon [Employment Relations Authority - Auckland]

    Summary:
    DISPUTE – Parties disputed interpretation of work hours clause in collective agreement – Whether respondent could restructure operations and introduce new roster pattern – Trials of new shift carried out…
    Result:
    Question answered in favour of respondent ; Costs reserved