MURRAY v OWAKA MOTORS (2008) LIMITED [2025] NZERA 207

This page summarises and embeds an Employment Relations Authority (ERA) determination. It is not legal advice.

Story in plain English

The Authority ordered remedies and addressed unjustified dismissal issues (partly successful).

In summary, Mr Murray alleges Owaka Motors (2008) Limited (the employer) unjustifiably dismissed him for losing his licence, unlawfully discriminated against him on the grounds of mental health, and failed to provide him with an individual employment agreement. After that, The Authority held an investigation meeting in Dunedin on 27 August 2024. Later, It is common ground that when the parties met on 12 December 2022, Mr Murray was dismissed.3 Mr Moore says he explained to Mr Murray that this was because he had lost his licence and could no longer do the role. The determination records that Given the importance of the licence issue to Mr Moore and the employer, The Authority found it more plausible that Mr Moore did explain to Mr Murray he was being dismissed because he had lost his licence. The Authority notes that Although the employer is a small business with fewer resources than a larger business, The Authority found there was still an insufficient investigation into the employer's concerns before dismissing Mr Murray. Ultimately, The Authority found the employer did not adequately raise its concerns with Mr Murray prior to the meeting on 12 December 2022, nor provide a reasonable opportunity for Mr Murray to respond to the concerns and have his views considered, before a decision was made. In the end, Discrimination [28] Mr Murray alleges Mr Moore dismissed him for mental health issues.

Key case markers

• This determination comes from the Christchurch registry.
• The parties are MURRAY (employee) and OWAKA MOTORS (2008) LIMITED (employer).
• Hearing date noted: 27 August 2024.
• Authority member: Lucia Vincent.

Key events described

• Mr Murray alleges Owaka Motors (2008) Limited (the employer) unjustifiably dismissed him for losing his licence, unlawfully discriminated against him on the grounds of mental health, and failed to provide him with an individual employment agreement.
• The Authority held an investigation meeting in Dunedin on 27 August 2024.
• It is common ground that when the parties met on 12 December 2022, Mr Murray was dismissed.3 Mr Moore says he explained to Mr Murray that this was because he had lost his licence and could no longer do the role.
• Given the importance of the licence issue to Mr Moore and the employer, The Authority found it more plausible that Mr Moore did explain to Mr Murray he was being dismissed because he had lost his licence.
• Although the employer is a small business with fewer resources than a larger business, The Authority found there was still an insufficient investigation into the employer's concerns before dismissing Mr Murray.
• The Authority found the employer did not adequately raise its concerns with Mr Murray prior to the meeting on 12 December 2022, nor provide a reasonable opportunity for Mr Murray to respond to the concerns and have his views considered, before a decision was made.
• Discrimination [28] Mr Murray alleges Mr Moore dismissed him for mental health issues.
• The Authority found it likely Mr Moore said as much during the meeting on 12 December 2022 and did not mention mental health concerns in relation to the dismissal because he did not rely on any such concerns when dismissing Mr Murray.
• Mr Murray has sought compensation of $25,000 for his unjustified dismissal and wages lost because of his grievance.

Decision markers

• Given the importance of the licence issue to Mr Moore and the employer, The Authority found it more plausible that Mr Moore did explain to Mr Murray he was being dismissed because he had lost his licence.
• Although the employer is a small business with fewer resources than a larger business, The Authority found there was still an insufficient investigation into the employer's concerns before dismissing Mr Murray.
• The Authority found the employer did not adequately raise its concerns with Mr Murray prior to the meeting on 12 December 2022, nor provide a reasonable opportunity for Mr Murray to respond to the concerns and have his views considered, before a decision was made.
• The Authority found it likely Mr Moore said as much during the meeting on 12 December 2022 and did not mention mental health concerns in relation to the dismissal because he did not rely on any such concerns when dismissing Mr Murray.

Orders and payments mentioned

• Compensation: $12,000
• Lost remuneration: $8,698
• Costs: Costs awarded.

Note: figures above are extracted from the orders section (or the final orders wording). Check the PDF for full context and any gross/net directions.

Practical takeaways

• Dismissal justification is assessed through s 103A: what a fair and reasonable employer could have done in all the circumstances.

Read the full ERA determination (embedded)

If the embedded PDF does not load on your device, use the button below to open it in a new tab.

Mobile / tablet tip: Some browsers do not display embedded PDFs reliably. Use the "Open" button above.

Source: Employment Relations Authority determination hosted on determinations.era.govt.nz.