![WYETH v HANSEN PRODUCTS (NZ) LIMITED [2025] NZERA 92 - A Determination was made.](/Images/site/EmploymentAdvocatesAucklandCard.jpg)
A Determination was made. Mr Wyeth was therefore only partially successful in his claims; • Mr Wyeth turned down a settlement offer of $10,000.00 made on a Calderbank basis on 23 May 2024.
New Zealand unfair dismissal (unjustified dismissal) case summaries from the Employment Relations Authority (ERA), explaining key facts, outcomes, and lessons for employees and employers.
These unfair dismissal (unjustified dismissal) case summaries cover Employment Relations Authority (ERA) decisions from across New Zealand. Each case highlights the facts, the Authority's reasoning, and the outcome, so you can see what tends to help or hurt a dismissal justification.
If you are dealing with a dismissal dispute, these examples can help you understand common errors in process, the standard of reasonableness applied, and typical remedies where a dismissal is found to be unjustified.
A Determination was made. Mr Wyeth was therefore only partially successful in his claims; • Mr Wyeth turned down a settlement offer of $10,000.00 made on a Calderbank basis on 23 May 2024.
A costs determination was made. The final meeting in relation to the allegations regarding the Ball occurred on 3 November 2023.
The Authority ordered remedies and addressed unjustified dismissal issues (partly successful). She was then emailed a termination letter at 10.00 pm on 26 December 2023.
The Authority ordered remedies and addressed unjustified dismissal issues. Mr Wei claimed the respondents failed to address this matter in an appropriate manner, which he alleged led to him being subjected to a (quoted wording omitted) in the workplace by Ms Gong on 13...
The Authority ordered remedies and addressed unjustified dismissal issues (partly successful). This was confirmed in writing by way of an undated letter, stating that she was being dismissed in accordance with the trial period in her employment agreement, and would receive...
The Authority ordered remedies and addressed unjustified dismissal issues (partly successful). She was dismissed on 26 December 2023 under a 90-day trial period after she had been working for 100 days.
A preliminary determination dealing with a strike-out application, including whether the Authority was prevented from hearing the claims because of a prior settlement and related legal doctrines.
The Authority ordered remedies and addressed unjustified dismissal issues (partly successful). On 13 December 2023, Ms Huynh sent Ms Lien a letter alleging that she was working for another salon, and that this could amount to serious misconduct and a conflict of interest.