ClickCease

Results for unfair dismissal

Showing 145-152 of 321 results
Andrew McFarlane v Stuff Limited [2026] NZERA 623 - redundancy selection and redeployment failures made dismissal unjustified

Stuff had genuine commercial reasons to restructure, but it failed to properly establish that Andrew McFarlane's existing role was surplus before making him compete for a substantially similar role. The ERA found the dismissal unjustified, criticised the contestable selection and redeployment process, and awarded $25,000 compensation plus $30,840.98 gross lost remuneration and holiday pay.

Matched passage: See also Redundancy and Unjustified redundancy and unfair dismissal .
Shenwei Zhang v Fat Dragon Restaurant Management Limited and Kejian Ji [2025] NZERA 737 - 'casual' label rejected; unjustified dismissal by WeChat; $5,686.33 reimbursement, $12,000 compensation, $9,904.08 arrears plus interest

Shenwei Zhang worked for Fat Dragon Restaurant Management under an arrangement the employer described as casual. After the relationship deteriorated, his work was ended through WeChat and he pursued dismissal, wage and holiday-pay claims.

Matched passage: Employee Unfair Dismissal Case Form 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.
JIANG v TRUSTED TOUCH THERAPY LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION) and ORS [2025] NZERA 385 - unjustified dismissal and employment-standard breaches

Ms Jiang worked for Trusted Touch Therapy under disputed casual-employment paperwork and later raised dismissal and minimum-employment-standard claims. The company entered liquidation after the investigation meeting, and the ERA also considered inaccurate wage and time records.

Matched passage: ... 18 February 2025 and 13 March 2025 Outcome: The Authority ordered remedies and addressed unjustified dismissal issues (partly successful). Story in plain English The Authority ordered remedies and addressed unjustified dismissal issues (partly successful). In summary, Ms ...
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.
CHUNG v HUYNH [2025] NZERA 69 - trial-period defence fails; dismissal unjustified

Ms Chung was dismissed by email late on Boxing Day after about 100 days of work, with the employer purporting to rely on a 90-day trial period. General performance criticisms were raised later but had not formed a fair dismissal process at the time.

Matched passage: Dismissal justification is assessed through s 103A: what a fair and reasonable employer could have done in all the circumstances.
TRANG BUI v HUYNH [2025] NZERA 72 - dismissal and employment-entitlement claims partly successful

Trang Bui worked in a small hospitality business where the parties disputed pay, working arrangements and the circumstances in which her employment ended. The ERA considered dismissal and disadvantage claims alongside minimum employment entitlement issues.

Matched passage: Dismissal justification is assessed through s 103A: what a fair and reasonable employer could have done in all the circumstances.
Qi Sun v Keene Construction Limited [2026] NZERA 465 - builder dismissed by text after querying apprenticeship costs

Qi Sun was an apprentice builder with Keene Construction when he queried an unpaid $300 apprenticeship-cost payment. The director then texted that there would not be a company and told him not to bother coming to work, creating a dispute about whether those messages amounted to dismissal.

Matched passage: Employee Unfair Dismissal Case Form 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.
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.

Matched passage: ... period: June 2024 to 20 March 2026 Application decided: interim reinstatement only Dismissal allegation: summary dismissal for serious misconduct Authority's interim assessment: an arguable unjustified-dismissal claim with particular strength on predetermination 2026 ...

Browse topics