Contentious disputes arise in all relationships and employment relationships are no exception.

Besides one’s liberty, health, and family, their job or their business is often the next most important thing in their lives. Employment disputes are therefore significant for all involved. They are frequently complex and urgent. They can be expensive and emotive.

Typical employment claims on which we advise include:

• Personal grievances (unjustified dismissal, unjustified disadvantage, harassment, and discrimination)
• Arrears of wages claims
• Employee fraud claims
• Employment status disputes
• Minimum entitlement claims (including under the Employment Relations Act 2000, Holidays Act 2003, Wages Protection Act 1983)
• Breach of contract, compliance and penalty claims
• Discrimination and harassment claims under the Human Rights Act 1993
• Strikes, pickets, lockouts and other “collective” bargaining related claims
• Employee competition claims, including injunctions, enforcement of restraints of trade, “team move” claims, breach fiduciary duties, breaches of the duty of fidelity, misuse of confidential information.
• Interference with privacy
• WorkSafe (and private) prosecutions.

Our lawyers appear and have represented clients in all courts and tribunals in New Zealand where employment litigation is conducted. These include MBIE’s Mediation Services (and private mediation), the Employment Relations Authority, the Employment Court, the Human Rights Review Tribunal, the High Court, the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court.

Many of the matters on which we have been instructed have been important cases in the employment jurisdiction, including a number of the leading and test cases. But we know and appreciate that all cases are important to those involved. We tailor our advice and approach to suit.

Examples of the contentious work on which we have been instructed include:

Minimum entitlements

• Representing Tourism Holdings Limited in the Authority, Employment Court, Court of Appeal and Supreme Court, in a test case proceeding that considered whether employees whose weekly pay varied from week to week, were entitled to count commissions they earned sporadically, in their holiday pay calculations under the Holidays Act 2003. Tourism Holdings Limited v A Labour Inspector of the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment [2021] NZSC 157.
• Representing Restaurant Brands in the Authority, the Employment Court, Court of Appeal and Supreme Court, in a test case that considered whether a Labour Inspector has jurisdiction to bring an action on behalf of a class of workers for minimum employment entitlements in the Employment Relations Authority, where there was a dispute over whether they were contractors or employees. Gill Pizza Limited and Ors v A Labour Inspector of the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment and Restaurant Brands (as intervenor) [2021] NZSC 184.
• Representing the plaintiff employee in the leading Employment Court case on holiday pay on incentive payments paid after employment has ended. Howell v Zeetags [2014] NZEmpC 25.

Good faith

• Representing the employer in the Employment Court in the leading case on an employer’s good faith obligation to consult with employees on confidential commercial transactions, and the application of the statutory exemption to that obligation. Birthing Centre v Matsas and Ors [2023] NZEmpC 162.

Employee competition claims

• Representing several employer clients in obtaining urgent without notice “freezing orders” and “search orders” from the Employment Court. TradeZone Industrial Group Ltd v Stanton [2025] NZEmpC 15, Plan B Limited v Tam Roberts [2019] NZEmpC 108.
• Development of the procedure and suite of orders now widely used by employer claimants in the Employment Relations Authority for urgent orders against employees who have misused confidential information, that they disclose documents, and that their computer systems be cloned and examined. This procedure has been approved by the Employment Court in Johnstone v Kinetic Recruitment [2018] NZEmpC 126.
• Representing the “team”, new employer, and former employer clients in a number of the leading team move cases, including in High Court , and the Employment Court. For e.g. Brook Asset Management Limited v Firmin and Ors (High Court).
• Representing Transpacific Industries in restraint of trade proceedings removed from the Employment Relations Authority to the Full Employment Court where the Court revisited an earlier (single judge) judgment on the enforceability of the same restraint of trade, the principles that apply to the enforcement of them, and the process to be followed before an order to modify them is made. Transpacific Industries Limited v Green and Harris [2013] NZEmpC 13.
• Representing Nortel Limited and three of its employees in High Court claims brought by their former employer for misuse of confidential information and conspiracies by unlawful means. The case is important for its examination of the law on preparatory steps that may be taken by a departing employee, including what is and what is not “confidential information”, and because of one defendant’s successful claim to overturn an Anton Piller Order obtained and executed unlawfully: SGS (NZ) Limited v Nortel & Ors (Employment Court).

Industrial relations litigation

• Representing China Navigation Co in proceedings removed to the Employment Court (and on appeal to the Court of Appeal) on the extent to which an employer is required to bargain with a union for a CA in a Greenfields’ situation, before the union has any member employees. Maritime Union of New Zealand Inc v China Navigation Company Pte Ltd [2016] NZEmpC 111.
• Representing General Distributors t/a Countdown Supermarkets in test case proceedings removed from the Employment Relations Authority to the Full Employment Court where the provisions in the Employment Relations Act 2000, on “passing on” of terms and conditions of employment were considered for the first time. National Distribution Union Inc v General Distributors Ltd [2010] NZEmpC 147 (Full Employment Court).
• Representing General Distributors t/a Foodtown and Countdown supermarkets in multiple proceedings commenced by the union in the Employment Court in relation to Countdown’s lockout of its supermarket workers during collective bargaining (reported to be New Zealand’s longest lockout). National Distribution Union v General Distributors Ltd [2006] ERNZ 790.

Human Rights claims

• Representing the defendant in its defence of the test case brought by a breast-feeding mother, in the Human Rights Review Tribunal, on the grounds that its treatment of her while breast feeding was “sex” discrimination pursuant to the Human Rights Act 1993 on the grounds of breast feeding. This case which is unheard will consider whether the definition of “sex” discrimination includes, breast feeding.

Health and Safety

• Representing The Supply Chain Limited in its successful appeal to the High Court of a “manifestly excessive” sentence imposed on it by the District Court following a prosecution by the Department of Labour (OSH) under the Health and Safety in Employment Act 1992: The Supply Chain Limited v Department of Labour (High Court).

Institutions powers and jurisdiction

• Representing GEA Engineering in multiple proceedings in the Employment Relations Authority and Employment Court, where the Court overturned the Authority’s decision to strike out a proceeding without investigating it, on the ground the Authority lacked the power to do so. GEA Process Engineering Limited v Schicker [2019] NZEmpC 166.

Other

• Representing one of New Zealand’s leading contemporary artists, Stephen Bambury, in his High Court proceeding (and the appeal to the Court of Appeal) against his former gallerist for breach of the gallerist’s fiduciary duty to account to him for works and proceeds from the sake of works. Stephen Bambury v Andrew Jensen [2015] NZHC 2384.