ClickCease

Results for final pay

Showing 105-112 of 223 results
CHAND v ROHITS CIVIL & INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION) [2025] NZERA 574 - telephone dismissal unjustified

Mr Chand said Rohits Civil & Infrastructure dismissed him during a telephone conversation; the company disputed that account. The ERA had to decide whether the words and surrounding circumstances objectively brought the employment relationship to an end.

Matched passage: Orders and payments mentioned Compensation: $4,000 Note: figures above are extracted from the orders section (or the final orders wording).
BLIGNAUT v WASTE MANAGEMENT NZ LIMITED [2025] NZERA 560 - The personal grievance for unjustified disadvantage was upheld.

Mr Blignaut challenged Waste Management's treatment of him during a workplace conflict, including alleged bullying, suspension and pressure to resign, before he was ultimately dismissed for alleged serious misconduct. The ERA considered both the pre-dismissal disadvantage claims and the termination itself.

Matched passage: Orders and payments mentioned Compensation: $20,000 Penalty: $2,500 Note: figures above are extracted from the orders section (or the final orders wording).
BELL v HUBERGROUP NEW ZEALAND LIMITED [2025] NZERA 561 - redundancy business case and consultation both deficient

Ms Bell challenged the disestablishment of her role at Hubergroup, arguing that the redundancy lacked a genuine business basis and that she was given an inadequate opportunity to consult on a proposal assembled in haste.

Matched passage: Orders and payments mentioned Lost Wages: $18,333.
JAYALATH v INFOSYS LIMITED [2025] NZERA 539 - dismissal over mandatory training modules unjustified

Infosys dismissed Mr Jayalath for failing to complete mandatory online business modules after a disciplinary process run partly by overseas management. He challenged both the substantive basis for treating the failure as dismissible conduct and the fairness of the procedure.

Matched passage: Accordingly, Infosys is ordered to pay Mr Jayalath $4,807.
LEVI-ADAMS v GREENE [2025] NZERA 531 - material withheld until after dismissal; dismissal unjustified

Ms Levi-Adams was dismissed by Greene after a process in which important material was not provided to her until after the termination decision. The ERA examined whether she had been given the information and opportunity to respond that a fair and reasonable employer was required to provide.

Matched passage: Orders and payments mentioned Compensation: $13,500 Lost Wages: 13 weeks' Costs: Costs awarded.
WILKINS v DD GROUP HOLDINGS LIMITED [2025] NZERA 536 - 90-day trial invalid because agreement was signed after work began

DD Group Holdings relied on a 90-day trial clause to dismiss Kelly Wilkins, but she had already begun paid training before the employment agreement containing the clause was signed. Her own conduct was also relevant to remedies.

Matched passage: Before the agreement was signed, she attended a three-day training course that the employer agreed to pay her for.
CULLY v THE WORK SHOP LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION) [2025] NZERA 507 - constructive-dismissal and wage claims; $12,000 ordered

Mr Cully resigned from The Work Shop Limited and alleged the employer's breaches were serious enough to amount to constructive dismissal. He also sought unpaid wages and compensation, requiring the ERA to determine whether his resignation was legally attributable to the employer's conduct.

Matched passage: 62 for unpaid wages and compensation of $12,500.
XU v ABHYUDAYA LIMITED and Anor [2025] NZERA 502 - genuine redundancy but process unjustified

Architectural technician Ms Xu was told her role was redundant during a downturn in work. The employer had genuine commercial reasons to reduce staffing, but the decision was communicated without meaningful consultation beforehand.

Matched passage: Orders and payments mentioned Lost remuneration: $1,569.

Browse topics