ClickCease

Unfair Dismissal (Unjustified Dismissal) Case Summaries | ERA New Zealand

New Zealand unfair dismissal (unjustified dismissal) case summaries from the Employment Relations Authority (ERA), explaining key facts, outcomes, and lessons for employees and employers.


Unfair Dismissal (Unjustified Dismissal) Cases

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 have an active employment problem and deadlines, get advice early. If you are considering raising a Personal Grievance (PG), the 90 day notification time limit can be critical.

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.


Search
Search cases, guides and topics.
Tip: press / to search
Showing 33-40 of 246 articles in Unfair Dismissal (Unjustified Dismissal) Case Summaries | ERA New Zealand
Sukhmanpreet Singh v JIT Limited, Davinder Pal and Harmanpreet Kaur Sandhu [2026] NZERA 453 - forced leave request, unjustified suspension and dismissal

Sukhmanpreet Singh's dispute with JIT arose after he was pressed to submit an annual-leave request and a confrontation followed. JIT then cancelled his shifts on claimed mental-stress grounds and later dismissed him for serious misconduct, while the ERA examined the conduct of both sides.

Sidney Yu and Jing Tham v Queenstown Nursery Limited [2026] NZERA 446 - casual employment, fixed assignment and unjustified dismissal

Sidney Yu and Jing Tham were engaged by Queenstown Nursery for temporary plant work and were later selected to stop working, with the employer relying on weather and alleged comparative inefficiency. The case concerned whether the casual or short-assignment characterisation justified ending their work without a fair process.

Steven David Mitchell v Tasman Rugby Union Incorporated [2026] NZERA 435 - CEO returned to payroll on interim reinstatement

Tasman Rugby Union dismissed chief executive Steven Mitchell after an organisational review became intertwined with later misconduct allegations. He sought interim reinstatement, arguing the process appeared predetermined and that his substantive dismissal grievance had real strength.

Filisi Beswick v Friendly Loans Limited [2026] NZERA 436 - medical incapacity dismissal without a fair inquiry

Friendly Loans dismissed Filisi Beswick for medical incapacity less than four weeks after hospitalisation, despite updated information that her condition had improved and requests to discuss returning or working from home. The employer also deducted $2,439.09 from her final pay for a loan.

Ilalio Solomona v Auckland Council [2026] NZERA 418 - conflict of interest dismissal unjustified

Ilalio Solomona was dismissed by Auckland Council after conflict-of-interest concerns about his outside personal-training business. Although his employment obligations could legitimately restrict outside activity, the disciplinary process did not put the contractual obligations actually relied on to him for response.

Aaron Potter v Talley's Limited [2026] NZERA 412 - flawed HSR election disciplinary process and unjustified dismissal

Aaron Potter was disciplined and dismissed by Talley's after disputes surrounding a health and safety representative election and communications involving other employees. The case focused on whether Talley's properly investigated the competing accounts and relevant messages before deciding serious misconduct was established.

Browse topics