Unfair Dismissal (Unjustified Dismissal) Case Summaries | ERA New Zealand

Ronald Thomas Shea was told by phone that there was no more work for him after his trucking and contracting hours fell sharply. STLand Contracting Limited had genuine financial pressure and could have commenced a workplace change process, but it did nothing. The ERA found a clear dismissal without consultation, found that Mr Shea had also been bullied in an unsafe workplace, and ordered $45,600 in notice pay, lost wages, compensation and costs...

Auckland Council summarily dismissed a fitness instructor over an undeclared personal-training business and three social-media videos filmed at a Council leisure centre. The ERA held that the Council relied on policies which did not in substance fit the alleged conflict, failed to raise the contractual obligations it might have relied on, and pursued discipline over matters known long beforehand without first discussing them in good faith. The dismissal was unjustified. Remedies were reduced by 10 percent for the employee's use of customers and the workplace to promote his own business...

Neil Hall's Northland asbestos-surveyor and mould-testing role was genuinely disestablished for commercial reasons, but Consultex Company Limited failed to consult in good faith. It did not meaningfully answer Mr Hall's request for financial information, failed to engage with his redeployment question, and sent a response that strongly suggested the decision had already been made before consultation closed. The ERA found unjustified dismissal and ordered $8,000 compensation, with no reduction for contribution...

Aaron Potter was summarily dismissed by Talley's Limited after a complaint connected with an election for a health and safety representative. The ERA found Talley's had not properly investigated the complaint, had not clearly set out the allegations or supporting information, had not given Mr Potter a fair opportunity to respond, and could not reasonably conclude that he had bullied, intimidated, or attempted to influence the vote. Mr Potter was awarded $20,000 compensation and $7,226.25 gross lost remuneration, no contribution was found...

Sophie Kennett was required to resign before holiday leave and then re-employed after the break. The ERA held that Polygon had manufactured the termination to minimise Holidays Act liabilities, meaning her employment was continuous. It also found a later redundancy dismissal unjustified because the business sale remained uncertain, redeployment was not properly considered, relevant information was withheld, and no contractual notice was provided. The Authority ordered compensation, lost wages, notice pay, Holidays Act entitlements, wage arrears, interest and a penalty...

The Department of Corrections dismissed Principal Corrections Officer Rakai Tawhiwhirangi after he used force on a prisoner and did not report the incident. Although he had been acquitted of assault on the basis of self-defence, Corrections revisited the same factual questions and reached the opposite conclusions. The ERA found the dismissal unjustified because Corrections blurred the criminal and employment issues, did not properly identify and assess the remaining policy breaches, allowed a conflicted decision maker to continue, and relied on conduct that was not put as an allegation. Reinstatement was declined, but the Authority ordered $17,000 compensation and $19,882.50 lost wages after a 15 percent contribution reduction...

Rachel Hankins was engaged as an accountant on a fixed term maternity-cover agreement due to end on 15 August 2025. The ERA found the fixed term complied with section 66 of the Employment Relations Act 2000, but Huhtamaki Henderson Limited prematurely ended the employment relationship by requiring the return of company property, cutting off IT access, and treating her engagement as concluded before the agreed end date. The Authority found unjustified dismissal and unjustified disadvantage, ordering $11,500 compensation and four weeks' salary.

ZZP was dismissed by the Commissioner of Inland Revenue on medical grounds after a lengthy absence and a failed return-to-work attempt. The ERA accepted that IRD had given ZZP a reasonable opportunity to recover and had been entitled to treat the medical evidence cautiously. However, the dismissal was unjustified because the decision maker relied on several concerns in the final decision letter that had not been put to ZZP for comment. Reinstatement and lost wages were declined, but compensation was assessed at $25,000 and reduced by 25 percent for contribution, resulting in $18,750 payable.