|
Previous Section | Table of Contents | Next Section
Busch v Zion Wildlife Gardens Ltd and Anor
9 Dec 2008, Y S Oldfield, AA 415/08, (12 pages)
PRACTICE AND PROCDURE - Identity of employer - Respondents argued second respondent should be removed from proceedings - Authority declined to remove second respondent until full hearing of relevant evidence as to applicant's correct employer - Parties previously applied to restrict publication of proceedings - In Minute, Authority declined TVNZ request to film substantive proceedings - Parties made submissions regarding discretion to limit publication in relation to interlocutory applications - Authority excluded press from interim reinstatement investigation meeting, treating it as being in nature of chambers meeting - INJUNCTION - Application for interim reinstatement - Applicant suspended while respondent conducted investigation into allegations of serious misconduct - Applicant declined to attend disciplinary meeting - Respondent dismissed applicant for serious misconduct, effective immediately - Authority satisfied that substantive and procedural issues raised by applicant gave rise to arguable case - Authority also considered applicant met threshold of tenable arguable case for permanent reinstatement as remedy - In balance of inconvenience, Authority found applicant unable to take up former duties or care for animals unless regained licence from MAF - Found conflict would likely ensue if applicant reinstated, causing major disruption to respondents - Applicant not suffering financial hardship as in receipt of earnings related compensation for injury - Reinstatement of no practical effect while applicant continued to be unfit for work - Authority considered respondents' obligations to staff who stated could not work with applicant - Respondents offered to pay for alternative accommodation if required applicant to leave on-site accommodation - Balance of convenience favoured respondents - Applicant argued overall justice of case favoured applicant as had little chance of finding alternative employment and was concerned about welfare of animals - Authority found welfare of animals matter for MAF, not Authority - Not certain when applicant would be fit to work regardless - Garden leave would not address applicant's desire to work with animals - Authority did not consider injustice would done by requiring applicant to wait for short time remaining until full investigation completed - Application for interim reinstatement declined - Wildlife park operator
Result: Application dismissed (interim reinstatement) ; Costs reserved
Previous Section | Table of Contents | Next Section
|
