The Employment Relations Authority has rejected an employee’s application to reopen a determination which rejected her personal grievance claim of unjustified dismissal.

The employee initially attempted to file claims of unjustified disadvantage and dismissal in the Authority against her employer. The Authority determined that only a claim of unjustified disadvantage was raised in time and that no other grievances may be raised out of time.

The employee applied to reopen this matter on the basis that the Authority misunderstood her position in regard to the dismissal, and wished to use evidence from her substantive unjustified disadvantage hearing in her argument.

The Authority had to consider whether there were grounds to reopen the unjustified dismissal matter. To determine this, the Authority asked whether a failure to reopen the matter would constitute an actual miscarriage of justice.

It was decided that the answer to this question was no. Firstly, the employee had ample opportunity to submit evidence for consideration in the initial hearing. As well as this, the employee did not provide any new evidence that could influence a change in outcome. There was also a significant period of time between the initial hearing and the filing of the reopening application.

The employee was unsuccessful in getting her unjustified dismissal claim reopened.

If there is confusion around the correct process for the dismissal of an employee, it pays to seek advice from a professional in the area.

Leading law firms committed to helping clients cost-effectively will have a range of fixed-price Initial Consultations to suit most people’s needs in quickly learning what their options are.  At Rainey Collins we have an experienced team who can answer your questions and put you on the right track.

Alan Knowsley and Matthew Binnie

Litigation Team
Wellington