Search Employment Law

This article examines how disputed accounting material in Menzies v Corrigan moved from a liquidator's reference to 'excessive drawings' into evidence used in proceedings seeking personal compliance orders against a company director. It also traces later disclosure issues involving material routed through Catherine Stewart Barrister's office.

A critique of the Employers and Manufacturers Association case for new regulation of employment advocates, focusing on whether the publicly identified evidence demonstrates widespread advocate-specific consumer harm.

Employee-side no-win-no-fee employment advocacy for suitable personal-grievance, dismissal and redundancy cases, including mediation and ERA representation where the case meets the acceptance criteria.

The Employment Court found two unjustified disadvantages in a long-running school employment dispute: former employers listed on LMN's CV were contacted without authority while her grievances were being investigated, and medical certificates were not properly recognised when dealing with her leave. Most of LMN's wider claims failed.

Shaun Graves initially worked through his own contracting company, but later moved onto NZSL's PAYE payroll, worked regular hours under its direction and used its equipment. The ERA found he had become an employee from 23 September 2024 and was unjustifiably dismissed when simply told his services were no longer required.

After a customer complaint, truck driver Eric Tillocksingh was called into meetings without advance written allegations or warning that dismissal was possible. The ERA preferred his evidence that he was told to resign or be dismissed, found the process fundamentally unfair, and awarded $15,000 compensation plus $17,448.75 lost remuneration.

ERA Home denied that Xuefeng Yang had ever become its employee, despite a signed employment agreement, an approved work visa and evidence that he worked at its construction site. The ERA found an employment relationship existed, upheld unjustified dismissal and disadvantage claims, awarded $23,000 compensation and $8,008.20 lost wages plus holiday pay, and imposed a $3,000 penalty on the company.

Ballance established that long-serving employee Herewini Dickson breached a safety SOP and that the conduct was capable of serious misconduct, but its process was still unfair. The ERA found both his suspension and dismissal unjustified because critical evidence was not disclosed, the HiPo classification was not fairly put to him and alternatives to dismissal were not adequately considered. Remedies were reduced 30 percent for contribution.