Mark Beveridge v PVB Investments Limited: 'Bugger off' at the Ashurst Deer N Duck Inn was an unjustified dismissal (2026 NZERA 51)

A cook was told to 'bugger off' and leave the premises amid police concerns about marijuana plants on the owner's property. The ERA found this was a dismissal and awarded $13,520 lost wages, $10,000 compensation, and $249.60 holiday pay (plus interest).

Read the ERA determination (PDF) Employee Unfair Dismissal Case Form

Case at a glance

• ERA citation: [2026] NZERA 51
• Determination date: 29 January 2026
• Member: Alyn Higgins
• Applicant: Mark Beveridge
• Respondents: PVB Investments Limited (employer) and Percy Vernon Burlace (director/shareholder)
• Type of claim: Personal Grievance (unjustified dismissal) plus alleged unjustified disadvantage and minimum entitlements
• Outcome: Unjustified dismissal established; unjustified disadvantage not made out; wage arrears for holiday pay ordered; penalties declined
• Remedies ordered: Lost wages $13,520.00 gross; compensation $10,000.00; holiday pay $249.60 gross plus interest

What happened

The applicant, Mark Beveridge, worked for a short period at the Ashurst Deer N Duck Inn, which was owned by PVB Investments Limited. The arrangement was informal and, on the evidence accepted by the ERA, included cash payments "nett of PAYE" and no written employment agreement or proper wage/time/leave records. At the time, Mr Beveridge was also receiving a sickness benefit and accepted he exceeded the permitted work limit; Mr Burlace knew about this and still agreed to cash payment arrangements.

During the short employment, there were online complaints about food served at the Inn after 1 September 2023. A discussion occurred the following day, but it was not handled as a formal disciplinary process and there were no written outcomes.

The trigger for the end of employment was not the food complaints, but police attention at Mr Burlace's farm property. On 3 September 2023 Mr Burlace received a call from police about alleged marijuana plants on the property. On 4 September 2023 Mr Burlace raised this with Mr Beveridge. Mr Beveridge said the plants were not his and he would speak to police to sort the matter out.

On 6 September 2023 Mr Beveridge went to the Inn to assist with an issue (including music equipment and/or kitchen assistance). Mr Burlace raised the police issue again and told Mr Beveridge to leave. The ERA's key finding of fact was that Mr Burlace told Mr Beveridge to "bugger off and leave the premises (the Inn) before the police arrived", without explaining that he meant only that the police discussion should occur away from the Inn.

Mr Beveridge left, and the parties then communicated about wages by text message. Mr Beveridge later emailed Mr Burlace saying he considered his employment had been ceased. The ERA considered that Mr Burlace had clear opportunities to clarify whether Mr Beveridge was still employed, but did not do so.

Was there a dismissal?

The respondents argued Mr Beveridge resigned or abandoned employment. The ERA applied the objective "sending away" test for dismissal and concluded it was reasonable for Mr Beveridge to believe his employment had been terminated. In particular, the ERA found that telling an employee to "bugger off" and leave the premises in these circumstances amounted to a dismissal, and that the employer then failed to take reasonable steps to clarify or correct that outcome.

The ERA's conclusion on dismissal was blunt: Mr Burlace dismissed Mr Beveridge, failed to ascertain whether he had opted to end employment himself, and it was therefore reasonable for Mr Beveridge to conclude his employment had been terminated.

Unjustified dismissal and other claims

The ERA held that Mr Beveridge established a personal grievance for unjustified dismissal. A separate claim of unjustified disadvantage (focused on missing written agreement and wage/time/leave records) did not succeed, because the ERA was not persuaded that those statutory breaches caused significant disadvantage on the facts of this case.

Even though the unjustified disadvantage grievance was not made out, the ERA still dealt with minimum entitlements and wage arrears, including whether holiday pay had been paid on termination. The ERA found it had not, and ordered the accrued holiday pay with interest.

Remedies and money ordered

Lost wages

The ERA accepted Mr Beveridge's claim for 13 weeks of lost wages, based on 40 hours per week at $26 gross per hour, totalling $13,520.00 gross. The respondents argued that any ongoing Work and Income payments should reduce the lost wages award, but the ERA rejected that approach and made no deduction.

Compensation

The ERA described the appropriate award as "modest" in the circumstances and fixed compensation for humiliation, loss of dignity, and injury to feelings at $10,000.00.

Holiday pay arrears

The ERA ordered payment of $249.60 gross as holiday pay (with interest calculated under the Interest on Money Claims Act 2016 as permitted by the Holidays Act 2003).

Contribution and penalties

The respondents sought a reduction for contribution (arguing, among other things, performance and complaints). The ERA declined any reduction because those matters were not addressed properly at the time.

Mr Beveridge also sought penalties for minimum entitlement breaches (no written agreement and missing wage/time records). The ERA acknowledged penalties can be available, but declined to impose a penalty in this case.

Leave to recover from the director personally

Mr Beveridge sought leave under section 142Y of the Employment Relations Act 2000 to recover money from Mr Burlace personally. The ERA declined leave, on the basis that Mr Beveridge had not proved the company was unable to pay the amounts ordered.

Orders

The ERA ordered PVB Investments Limited to pay Mr Beveridge within 28 days:

• Lost wages: $13,520.00 gross
• Compensation: $10,000.00
• Holiday pay: $249.60 gross plus interest

Costs were reserved.

Read the decision

Note: This article is a plain-English summary of a public ERA determination. If you need advice about an unfair dismissal or a Personal Grievance, get tailored advice for your situation.