This page summarises and displays the Employment Relations Authority (ERA) determination JHJ v IXX [2026] NZERA 2. The Authority found the employee was unjustifiably dismissed and awarded remedies for lost wages and compensation.
Non-publication: This determination includes a temporary order prohibiting publication of the parties' names and identifying details for 28 days following release. The published decision uses anonymised identifiers (for example, "JHJ" and "IXX"), and this page follows the same approach.
Case summary
- Citation: JHJ v IXX [2026] NZERA 2
- Authority location: Christchurch
- Member: Philip Cheyne
- Determination date: 5 January 2026
- Investigation meetings: 15 July 2025 and 19 September 2025 (Christchurch)
- Employment period: December 2023 to April 2024
- Issue: Summary dismissal following a workplace incident on 18 April 2024, and whether the dismissal was justified
- Outcome: Unjustified dismissal upheld
- Remedies ordered: $14,040.00 gross lost wages + $17,500.00 compensation (costs reserved)
Full determination (PDF): https://determinations.era.govt.nz/assets/elawpdf/2026/2026-NZERA-2.pdf
What happened
The employee worked for the respondent company from December 2023 until being summarily dismissed in April 2024. The employer said it dismissed him because of his behaviour at the workplace on 18 April 2024. The employee alleged he was unjustifiably dismissed and raised a personal grievance.
How the ERA assessed justification
The Authority applied the standard test of justification (Employment Relations Act 2000, section 103A): what a fair and reasonable employer could have done in all the circumstances. In practical terms, that includes whether the employer investigated the concerns, raised them with the employee, gave a reasonable opportunity to respond, and genuinely considered that response before deciding to dismiss.
Key findings
- Immediate dismissal: The Authority found the employee was dismissed on the day of the incident, before any meaningful investigation or process.
- No fair process: The employer did not investigate, did not put concerns to the employee, and did not provide an opportunity to respond before dismissal.
- Unjustified dismissal: These failures were not minor and resulted in unfair treatment, so the dismissal was unjustified.
Remedies and orders
- $14,040.00 gross reimbursement of lost remuneration (3 months' ordinary time remuneration cap) - payable within 28 days
- $17,500.00 compensation for hurt and humiliation (Employment Relations Act 2000, section 123(1)(c)) - payable within 28 days
- Contribution: The Authority did not reduce remedies for contributory conduct. It found there was no blameworthy conduct by the employee that contributed to the situation giving rise to the grievance.
- Costs: Costs were reserved. The decision sets a timetable for memoranda if the parties cannot resolve costs by agreement.
Practical takeaways
- Do not rely on summary dismissal without process. Even where an employer considers behaviour serious, it still usually needs a fair investigation and an opportunity to respond.
- Contemporaneous evidence matters. The Authority gave weight to contemporaneous communications and treated later statements from witnesses (who did not attend to give evidence) with caution.
- Remember the remedies framework. Lost wages are commonly capped at 3 months unless the Authority exercises discretion to go beyond the cap (and the evidence supports it).
Read the full determination
This is a public document hosted on the ERA determinations database. If the embedded document does not load on your device, use the button below to open it in a new tab.
![Auto John Huntley-Byrne v Dallison 2021 Limited [2026] NZERA 354 - unjustified café dismissal by text message](/Images/site/EmploymentAdvocatesAucklandCard.jpg)