PIACUN v COOPER NO 1 LIMITED and Anor [2025] NZERA 32

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.

In summary, She says that Cooper terminated her employment on 15 June 2023 without paid notice. After that, The Authority's Investigation Process [7] I received briefs of evidence prior to the investigation meeting from Ms Piacun and for Cooper, Ms Pugh, a human resources consultant for Cooper who was employed around the time that Cooper sold its business and Ms Piacun was dismissed. Later, Did Cooper dismiss Ms Piacun on 15 June 2023 without notice? The determination records that The Authority accepted Cooper terminated Ms Piacun from her employment on 15 June 2023 and that she did not receive any paid notice. The Authority notes that On 12 June 2023, her direct report manager emailed Ms Piacun asking her to meet him: Hi Mandy You may have heard that Rick and Dean2 have entered into an agreement to sell the company to [purchaser name]. Ultimately, Ms Piacun's final payslip shows she was paid $11,076.00 gross holiday pay less a nett figure of 10 days of holiday pay previously paid. 5 [20] Based on the above The Authority found that Ms Piacun was terminated from her employment by Cooper on 15 June 2023 and without any notice period paid. In the end, That quite clearly leaves this as a situation where Cooper unilaterally terminated Ms Piacun's employment without notice on 15 June 2023 through Ms Piacun's direct report manager.

Key case markers

• This determination comes from the Auckland registry.
• The parties are PIACUN (employee) and COOPER NO 1 LIMITED and Anor (employer).
• Hearing date noted: 1 October 2024.
• Authority member: Antoinette Baker.

Key events described

• She says that Cooper terminated her employment on 15 June 2023 without paid notice.
• The Authority's Investigation Process [7] I received briefs of evidence prior to the investigation meeting from Ms Piacun and for Cooper, Ms Pugh, a human resources consultant for Cooper who was employed around the time that Cooper sold its business and Ms Piacun was dismissed.
• Did Cooper dismiss Ms Piacun on 15 June 2023 without notice?
• The Authority accepted Cooper terminated Ms Piacun from her employment on 15 June 2023 and that she did not receive any paid notice.
• On 12 June 2023, her direct report manager emailed Ms Piacun asking her to meet him: Hi Mandy You may have heard that Rick and Dean2 have entered into an agreement to sell the company to [purchaser name].
• That quite clearly leaves this as a situation where Cooper unilaterally terminated Ms Piacun's employment without notice on 15 June 2023 through Ms Piacun's direct report manager.
• The reason is evidenced by the above referred Head of Finance's email to say that Ms Piacun had been 'made redundant from our end' because she had been on ACC for two years.
• I do not consider that the process of not consulting with Ms Piacun before dismissing her was minor.
• Standing back from the above I order Cooper to pay to Ms Piacun $18,000.00 compensation under s 123(1)(c)(i) for the 'humiliation, loss of dignity, and injury to feelings' likely suffered by Ms Piacun in relation to the unjustified dismissal.

Decision markers

• Ms Piacun's final payslip shows she was paid $11,076.00 gross holiday pay less a nett figure of 10 days of holiday pay previously paid. 5 [20] Based on the above The Authority found that Ms Piacun was terminated from her employment by Cooper on 15 June 2023 and without any notice period paid.
• The employee who had been on parental leave and had even less communication, was awarded $8,000.00.12 The Authority found here I have considerably more evidence from Ms Piacun about the effect on her which is also supported by the circumstances that I have considered above.

Orders and payments mentioned

• Compensation: $18,000.00
• 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

• Redundancy determinations usually turn on genuineness and consultation quality.
• 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.