Search employment law articles and guides

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.

A penalty determination was made. Mr Zheng's dismissal [24] On 26 May 2023 Mr Yan sent Mr Zheng a text message confirming BTL had summarily dismissed Mr Zheng from his employment because he ...

Ms Stillman says her dismissal on the basis of redundancy was not genuine, in that it lacked substantive justification and was procedurally deficient.

After an earlier unjustified dismissal determination and costs award, the employee applied for a compliance order because the employer and director had not paid.

The Employment Court left the ERA's unjustified redundancy dismissal findings undisturbed but held the Authority erred by rejecting separate unjustified disadvantage grievances.

The Employment Court, on a de novo challenge, again granted interim reinstatement to LGY pending the substantive dismissal grievance.

The Court held the dismissal substantively unjustified and awarded one year's salary and $35,000 compensation.

The Employment Court reversed an ERA interim decision and reinstated DQJ to the Inland Revenue payroll while her substantive dismissal grievance continued.