Previous Section | Table of Contents | Next Section
Douglas v Harmes Sharley International Ltd
1 Feb 2007, L Robinson, AA 24/07, (6 pages)
COMPLIANCE ORDER - Applicant sought compliance with record of settlement - Authority satisfied respondent failed to comply - Applicant's calculation of sum outstanding accepted - Compliance ordered - Interest awarded on outstanding sum - PENALTY - Respondent deliberately withheld payment - Not entitled to impose conditions on performance of record of settlement - No justification for failure to provide reference - Respondent's correspondence aimed at frustrating performance - Wilfully breached settlement - Penalty warranted - BREACH OF CONTRACT - Applicant also sought damages for non-economic loss - Not appropriate to deal with claim on papers alone - Counsel to confirm appropriate arrangements with Authority
Result: Compliance ordered ; Interest (9%) ; Application granted (Penalty) ; Penalty ($3,000)($1,000 payable to Crown)($2,000 payable to applicant) ; Application reserved (Breach of Contract) ; Orders accordingly ; Costs reserved
Henning (Labour Inspector) v Glenelg House Ltd
20 Jun 2007, H Doyle, CA 64/07, (2 pages)
COMPLIANCE ORDER - Compliance with demand notice sought - No objection to demand notice - No appearance for respondent - Authority satisfied demand notice properly served on respondent - Respondent directed to comply
Result: Compliance ordered ; Disbursements in favour of applicant ($70)(Filing fee)
Henning (Labour Inspector) v More Cows Canterbury Ltd
20 Jun 2007, H Doyle, CA 65/07, (2 pages)
COMPLIANCE ORDER - Compliance with demand notice sought - No objection to demand notice - No appearance for respondent - Authority satisfied demand notice properly served on respondent - Respondent directed to comply
Result: Compliance ordered ; Disbursements in favour of applicant ($70)(Filing fee)
Horn (Labour Inspector) v Cool Cars Ltd
5 Mar 2007, V Campbell, AA 58/07, (2 pages)
COMPLIANCE ORDER - Applicant Labour Inspector sought compliance with Authority determination - Respondent also failed to provide proof to support claim had no funds - Authority satisfied respondent had not complied with determination - Compliance ordered - Respondent warned of consequences of failure to comply
Result: Compliance ordered ; Disbursements in favour of applicant ($70)(Filing fee)
Labour Inspector (Jon Henning) v Glenelg House Ltd
28 Feb 2007, H Doyle, CA 19/07, (2 pages)
COMPLIANCE ORDER - Compliance with demand notice sought - No objection to demand notice - No appearance for respondent - Authority satisfied demand notice properly served on respondent - Respondent directed to comply
Result: Compliance ordered ; Disbursements in favour of applicant ($70)(Filing fee)
Labour Inspector (Jonathan D Henning) v Hamiltons Cleaning Service Central Otago (2004) Ltd
13 Mar 2007, J Crichton, CA 24/07, (2 pages)
COMPLIANCE ORDER - Compliance with demand notice sought - No objection to demand notice - No appearance for respondent - When contacted by Support Officer respondent claimed dealing with other affairs before admitted to hospital - Explanation used in past exchanges with applicant - Opportunity to engage representation - Authority satisfied demand notice properly served - Respondent directed to comply with demand notice within 14 days of determination
Result: Compliance ordered ; Costs to lie where they fall
Palin v Air New Zealand Ltd
8 Jan 2007, R A Monaghan, AA 1/07, (9 pages)
UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE - COMPLIANCE ORDER - Applicant alleged disadvantaged when respondent reneged on agreement resolving earlier personal grievance - Alternatively, sought compliance with agreement - Respondent claimed no agreement reached - Original grievance related to application of "lock on" provisions in collective employment agreement ("CEA") - Parties construed settlement discussions quite differently - Discussions could not be elevated to binding agreement - Also differences in parties' approach to potential for any resolution to set precedent or result in further grievances - Respondent sought assurance from pilots' association settlement with applicant would not lead to personal grievances from other pilots - Task probably unrealistic as association could not give promises on wider issue respondent had in mind - Respondent did not question applicant's genuinely-made representations concerns addressed - Left applicant with understanding resolution reached - Respondent should have acted promptly to address or correct impression applicant conveyed in subsequent letter - However, not appropriate to invoke this failure to impose agreement and would have potential to cut across operation of CEA to unacceptable extent - Parties' differences in approach and understanding too fundamental to allow for conclusion any meeting of the minds - No agreement to order compliance with - Personal grievance not made out - Authority did not address original personal grievance or dispute that crystallised after alleged settlement - Raised potentially complex issues and adjournment for preparation would have been necessary if Authority were to incorporate matters into present investigation - Authority commented original grievances not well-formulated in terms of s103 Employment Relations Act 2000 - Doubted original claim for bypass pay correctly described as grievance - Recommended mediation - Pilot
Result: Application dismissed ; Costs reserved
Rowe v Groganic Fertilisers Ltd
2 Mar 2007, R Arthur, AA 56/07, (2 pages)
COMPLIANCE ORDER - Applicant sought compliance with consent determination of Authority - Consent order covered parties' settlement agreement - Respondent to provide written reference in 14 days and pay compensation to applicant - Respondent claimed no funds at present to pay compensation - Agreement set no time frame for payment - However, respondent would not have been acting in good faith if made agreement knowing not able to pay in reasonable time - Insufficient information for Authority to conclude unreasonable for respondent to make good on promise made six weeks ago - Applicant sought interest but agreement did not provide for it - Respondent to pay compensation within 14 days and provide reference within 7 days - Compliance ordered - COSTS - Telephone conference - Applicant entitled to costs
Result: Compliance ordered ; Costs in favour of applicant ($250) ; Disbursements ($70)(Filing fee)
Rowe v Groganic Fertilisers Ltd
14 May 2007, Colgan, CJ, AC 23/07, (1 pages)
COMPLIANCE ORDER - Oral judgment - Parties reached settlement at Employment Relations Authority investigation meeting - Defendant agreed to pay $14,000 compensation within 14 days - Defendant failed to comply and Authority issued compliance order - Authority declined to allow payment by instalments - Defendant failed to pay and plaintiff applied to Court for compliance order - Defendant submitted it was impecunious - Defendant offered to pay debt over time making regular payments - HELD - Compliance order appropriate - Defendant to pay within 21 days: $14,000 compensation; Costs and disbursements in Authority of $270; Interest - COSTS - Costs in favour of plaintiff ($500 plus $618 disbursements) - COMMENT - If for good reason Authority orders cannot be complied with application can be made to Authority to have orders varied - If failure or refusal to comply due to temporary inability to raise funds professional assistance should be sought and reasonable proposals for settlement made to plaintiff and conveyed to Court
Result: Application granted ; Orders accordingly ; Costs in favour of plaintiff ($500 plus $618 disbursements)
Schoonderwoerd v Wooding Construction Ltd
20 Feb 2007, D King, AA 43/07, (1 pages)
COMPLIANCE ORDER - Applicant sought compliance with mediated settlement - No appearance by respondent - Authority satisfied respondent failed to comply with settlement - Compliance ordered
Result: Compliance ordered ; Disbursements in favour of applicant ($70)(Filing fee)
Turley v Evolution Paving and Landscaping Ltd
24 Jan 2007, P R Stapp, WA 10/07, (2 pages)
COMPLIANCE ORDER - Applicant sought compliance with mediated settlement - No appearance by respondent - Applicant had not received sum owed under agreement - Compliance ordered
Result: Compliance ordered ; Disbursements in favour of applicant ($70)(Filing fee)
Whittaker v Les Baty Engineeing Ltd
12 Feb 2007, P R Stapp, WA 24/07, (4 pages)
COMPLIANCE ORDER - Applicant sought compliance with record of settlement - Not constructive to direct matter to mediation - Respondent confirmed agreed sum not paid - Respondent stated had concerns about applicant and produced Statutory Declaration from third party in support - Declaration had little relevance to enforcement - If genuine issues arose from signing of settlement proper action should have been taken in separate proceedings - Compliance ordered - Respondent warned of consequences of failure to comply - COSTS - Based on three hours work and representation at $125 hour, reasonable costs for matter $375
Result: Compliance ordered ; Costs in favour of applicant ($375) ; Disbursements ($70)(Filing fee)
Previous Section | Table of Contents | Next Section
