ClickCease

Results for dismissal process

Showing 73-80 of 270 results
Hao v South Pole IP Holding (NZ) Limited [2025] NZERA 245 - pressure to resign caused constructive dismissal

South Pole treated Xinhua Hao as having agreed to resign, despite his repeated denials, then withheld work and continued pressing the resignation dispute. The ERA found those actions caused an unjustified constructive dismissal.

Matched passage: Why this case matters Hao v South Pole is a practical example of a disputed resignation becoming constructive dismissal.
90-day trial dismissal: when you can still raise an unfair dismissal personal grievance

A practical guide to New Zealand 90-day trial dismissals: when the clause is valid, the start date and notice requirements, and the mistakes that can leave an employer exposed to a personal grievance.

Matched passage: Why the courts take a strict approach Trial periods remove one of the core protections in NZ employment law (the ability to bring a personal grievance for unjustified dismissal), so courts and the Authority tend to interpret these clauses strictly.
Resignation letter: how to write it safely for a constructive dismissal case

Two resignation-letter approaches are explained: an ordinary amicable resignation and a resignation that records the employer conduct relied on for a possible constructive-dismissal grievance.

Matched passage: This page includes two templates: (1) a constructive dismissal resignation letter example and (2) an amicable resignation letter template.
No jab, no job: when refusal can lead to dismissal and a personal grievance

A guide to the employment-law disputes created by workplace Covid-19 vaccination requirements, including dismissal, disadvantage, consultation, alternatives and minimum-entitlement issues.

Matched passage: "No jab no job" disputes often turn into process failures: rushed decisions, weak consultation, and ignoring alternatives.
Juliet Hull v Sleaktek Limited and Robert Lawrence [2026] NZERA 579 - CEO wins dismissal and disadvantage claims

Sleaktek stopped paying chief executive Juliet Hull, pursued a redundancy process she said was predetermined and later raised serious-misconduct allegations that had not been fairly put to her. The case also concerned director Robert Lawrence's personal involvement.

Matched passage: The Employment Relations Authority upheld her unjustified dismissal and disadvantage claims and made substantial monetary orders.
Faitala and Vea v Pacific Island Business Development Trust [2026] NZEmpC 53 - disadvantage findings and remedies varied

Mr Faitala and Mrs Vea were made redundant by Pacific Island Business Development Trust during a flawed restructure. Their Employment Court challenge focused on pre-dismissal disadvantage during the process and the proper level of lost-remuneration and compensation remedies.

Matched passage: nz/judgments/decisions/"; } Faitala and Vea v Pacific Island Business Development Trust [2026] NZEmpC 53 - disadvantage findings and remedies varied Mr Faitala and Mrs Vea had already established unjustified redundancy dismissals in the ERA.
Jia Jia v TBS Trading Limited and Helen Han [2026] NZERA 478 - no employment agreement, late wages and radio-silent dismissal

Jia Jia began work for TBS Trading without a written employment agreement, experienced late wage payments and then found the employer stopped communicating and providing work. The case concerned whether that silence and withdrawal of work amounted to dismissal as well as separate pay and documentation breaches.

Matched passage: The employment lasted only about two and a half months, but the lack of an employment agreement, late wage payment, poor communication, and ending of work without process were enough to establish both unjustified dismissal and unjustified disadvantage.
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.

Matched passage: The Authority accepted that this communication raised a personal grievance for unjustified dismissal sufficient for the employer to respond.

Browse topics