ZHENG v BOYA TRADING LIMITED and Anor [2025] NZERA 427

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

Story in plain English

A penalty determination was made.

In summary, Mr Zheng's dismissal [24] On 26 May 2023 Mr Yan sent Mr Zheng a text message confirming BTL had summarily dismissed Mr Zheng from his employment because he refused to work and accused Mr Zheng of abandoning his employment. After that, Mr Zheng sought legal advice and on 30 June 2023 raised a personal grievance against BTL for unjustified disadvantage and unjustified dismissal. Later, By dismissing him by text message on 26 May 2023, Mr Zheng said he was unjustifiably dismissed by BTL. The determination records that He explained his dismissal was without warning or consultation and BTL had falsely accused him of abandoning his employment. The Authority notes that Reimbursement for lost wages [48] After his employment was terminated on 26 May 2023, Mr Zheng said he had obtained steady employment for a construction company where he was paid $23 an hour. Ultimately, Compensation for hurt and humiliation [54] Mr Zheng initially sought compensation under the Act for $15,000 for his successful unjustified disadvantage claim and $25,000 for his successful unjustified dismissal claim.2 As previously stated, the matter was dealt with as a claim for unjustified dismissal. In the end, On the Authority's usual tariff for an investigation meeting, for a full day of investigation meeting time, the appropriate order of costs is $4,500.

Key case markers

• This determination comes from the Auckland registry.
• The parties are ZHENG (employee) and BOYA TRADING LIMITED and Anor (employer).
• Hearing date noted: 12 November 2024.
• Authority member: Alex Leulu.

Key events described

• Mr Zheng's dismissal [24] On 26 May 2023 Mr Yan sent Mr Zheng a text message confirming BTL had summarily dismissed Mr Zheng from his employment because he refused to work and accused Mr Zheng of abandoning his employment.
• Mr Zheng sought legal advice and on 30 June 2023 raised a personal grievance against BTL for unjustified disadvantage and unjustified dismissal.
• By dismissing him by text message on 26 May 2023, Mr Zheng said he was unjustifiably dismissed by BTL.
• He explained his dismissal was without warning or consultation and BTL had falsely accused him of abandoning his employment.
• Reimbursement for lost wages [48] After his employment was terminated on 26 May 2023, Mr Zheng said he had obtained steady employment for a construction company where he was paid $23 an hour.
• Compensation for hurt and humiliation [54] Mr Zheng initially sought compensation under the Act for $15,000 for his successful unjustified disadvantage claim and $25,000 for his successful unjustified dismissal claim.2 As previously stated, the matter was dealt with as a claim for unjustified dismissal.
• On the Authority's usual tariff for an investigation meeting, for a full day of investigation meeting time, the appropriate order of costs is $4,500.

Decision markers

(No decision markers were extracted automatically.)

Orders and payments mentioned

• Reimbursement: $71.55
• Costs: $15,000, $4,500

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

• Unjustified disadvantage claims require both unjustified conduct and actual disadvantage.
• 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.