ClickCease

Results for unfair dismissal

Showing 209-216 of 266 results
PENNY v FRELLO LIMITED [2025] NZERA 317 - redundancy consultation and redeployment failures

Henry Penny was selected for redundancy from Frello's software-development team after a restructure intended to reduce headcount. He argued resignations had already reduced staff numbers, the selection outcome was predetermined, and consultation and redeployment were not genuine.

Matched passage: Dismissal justification is assessed through s 103A: what a fair and reasonable employer could have done in all the circumstances.
WILLIAMS v LONGEVITY CONSTRUCTION LIMITED and Anor [2025] NZERA 215 - redundancy substantively and procedurally unjustified

Mr Williams was told by email on 17 March 2024 that he had been made redundant immediately. He had not previously been told his job was in jeopardy, no supporting information accompanied the decision, and there had been no genuine consultation before the outcome was reached.

Matched passage: ... Determination date: 16 April 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, Mr ...
CHENG v THE VICE CHANCELLOR OF LINCOLN UNIVERSITY [2025] NZERA 167 - personal grievance partly successful; compensation and lost wages

Ms Cheng's case against Lincoln University involved several employment grievances and required the ERA to distinguish the claims that were made out from those that were not. The resulting orders included both compensation and a wage-related remedy rather than an across-the-board finding for either party.

Matched passage: Dismissal justification is assessed through s 103A: what a fair and reasonable employer could have done in all the circumstances.
Cameron Rix v Rotorua Quarry Limited [2025] NZERA 152 - The Authority found the employee was unjustifiably dismissed (abandonment was not made out) and awarded remedies.

Rotorua Quarry treated Cameron Rix's absence as abandonment and ended his employment. The ERA had to decide whether his conduct showed an intention to permanently walk away from the job and whether the employer was entitled to terminate on that basis.

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.
HILL v TAMAKI LABOUR HIRE LIMITED [2025] NZERA 100 - personal grievance partly successful; remedies limited to proven breaches

Mr Hill challenged the ending of his employment with Tamaki Labour Hire and associated treatment during the employment relationship. The case required the ERA to separate the parts of his grievance that were established from claims for which the evidence did not justify relief.

Matched passage: Dismissal justification is assessed through s 103A: what a fair and reasonable employer could have done in all the circumstances.
DRUMMOND v THE VICE-CHANCELLOR OF MASSEY UNIVERSITY [2025] NZERA 82 - 90-day limit: warning grievance in time, earlier claims out

Jackson Drummond sought to pursue a series of disadvantage, discrimination and good-faith complaints against Massey University, some dating back many months before his December 2023 grievance letter. The preliminary issue was which claims had actually been raised within the statutory 90-day period.

Matched passage: Dismissal justification is assessed through s 103A: what a fair and reasonable employer could have done in all the circumstances.
PAYNE and Ors v CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE MINISTRY FOR PRIMARY INDUSTRIES and Anor [2025] NZERA 79 - Preliminary strike-out (settlement/estoppel) issues

A group of MPI employees sought to pursue claims arising from roster and restructure changes despite earlier litigation and a mediated settlement. The preliminary determination addressed whether the claims were barred by the certified settlement, estoppel or the Authority's jurisdiction.

Matched passage: Dismissal justification is assessed through s 103A: what a fair and reasonable employer could have done in all the circumstances.
MOKE v RAUKURA HAUORA O TAINUI TRUST [2025] NZERA 48 - external investigation and disciplinary process partly unjustified

Ms Moke faced complaints and an external investigation while employed by Raukura Hauora O Tainui Trust. The case examined the fairness of the investigation, disciplinary steps and the Trust's eventual preliminary and final conclusions, including whether tikanga and kaupapa-based processes altered the statutory fairness requirements.

Matched passage: Practical takeaways Dismissal justification is assessed through s 103A: what a fair and reasonable employer could have done in all the circumstances.

Browse topics