![JHJ v IXX [2026] NZERA 2 - Unjustified dismissal and temporary non-publication](/Images/site/EmploymentAdvocatesAucklandCard.jpg)
JHJ v IXX [2026] NZERA 2 is an unjustified dismissal determination.
Use the search box below (or in the menu bar above) to find topics and articles.
Results for ERA
JHJ v IXX [2026] NZERA 2 is an unjustified dismissal determination.
In Jingkai Wang v E|nvoco Ltd [2025] NZERA 845, the ERA found the employee was not dismissed and had resigned.
An ERA finding of unjustified dismissal where the employer tried to rely on a trial period clause that did not meet s 67A requirements and then failed to engage with the Authority's investigation.
In Lautusi Isaako v ABS Builders Limited [2025] NZERA 678 (Auckland), the ERA found Mr Isaako was an employee (not a contractor) and was unjustifiably dismissed by a text message.
The ERA found the employer dismissed an anonymised truck driver by effectively "running dead" after a heated meeting, then leaving him suspended without pay while the director was overseas.
Mr Wang says that he was dismissed and has made grievance claims for unjustified dismissal and disadvantages during his employment including bullying and harassment, unilateral shift changes and.
The letter referred to matters set out by WRW in her resignation letter and several additional matters.
He says he was constructively dismissed for all these reasons and seeks compensation of $7,200 or actual lost remuneration to April 2024 when he found new employment.