Search Employment Law

Ilalio Solomona was dismissed by Auckland Council after conflict-of-interest concerns about his outside personal-training business. Although his employment obligations could legitimately restrict outside activity, the disciplinary process did not put the contractual obligations actually relied on to him for response.

Neil Hall was made redundant from Consultex's Northland asbestos and mould work after a downturn that gave the employer a genuine reason to reduce headcount. The dispute centred on whether Consultex complied with its good-faith information and consultation obligations before choosing and implementing the redundancy.

SAS Builders made Stephanie Martin redundant during a 2024 restructure. The central issues were whether the commercial restructure was genuine, whether the consultation was fair, and whether she should have been considered for a new role created in the business.

ZiGen Wong worked for NZAT Construction without a valid work visa and was later denied wages and employment protections on the basis that the arrangement was not lawful employment. He claimed employee status, arrears and constructive dismissal.

Jingkai Wang claimed Envoco had dismissed him and subjected him to bullying and an unsafe workplace, while the employer said he resigned. The evidence also included covert recordings and a trial clause signed only after work had begun.

North Beach relied on a 90-day trial clause to argue Noel Camacho could not bring an unjustified-dismissal grievance, but the same employment agreement also contained a probation clause that conflicted with the trial wording.

EverEdge stopped paying founder and CEO Paul Adams while he continued working from Amsterdam, ignored repeated requests for his salary and later gave inconsistent explanations for the non-payment. Mr Adams ultimately resigned.

Cook Mark Beveridge was told to 'bugger off' and leave the Ashurst Deer N Duck Inn during a confrontation connected with police concerns about marijuana plants on the owner's property. The employer disputed whether those words had actually ended the employment.