NEW ZEALAND PUBLIC SERVICE ASSOCIATION AND ANOR V ASURE NEW ZEALAND CA CA15/06

NEW ZEALAND PUBLIC SERVICE ASSOCIATION AND ANOR V ASURE NEW ZEALAND CA CA15/06

Leave to appeal was dismissed because the proposed grounds failed to disclose any genuinely arguable question of law or prospects of success: on the facts (Asure never provided facilities, AFFCO controlled facilities, shared facilities common) there was no basis to imply a contractual term and no error in the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
openlaw-26fc6053_a4ad_4c62_911d_b8df7f5b67b0.pdf
Parties
First Appellant: New Zealand Public Service Association; Second Appellants: Bryan Max Sanderson and 14 Others; Respondent: Asure New Zealand
Court
Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
15 May 2006
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal to the Court of Appeal / Judgment on Application for Leave to Appeal
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed; appellants ordered to pay costs and usual disbursements.
Legal Topics
Implied Terms, Custom and Practice, Health and Safety in Employment Act 1992, Leave to Appeal
Employment Law Health and Safety Law Contract Law Labour Relations Implied Terms Custom and Practice Health and Safety in Employment Act 1992 Leave to Appeal

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

New Zealand Public Service Association

First Appellant

Bryan Max Sanderson and 14 Others

Second Appellants

Asure New Zealand

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Appeal to the Court of Appeal / Judgment on Application for Leave to Appeal

  1. 1 Whether a custom and practice of a third party (AFFCO) can give rise to an implied term in contracts between Asure and its inspectors
  2. 2 Whether Asure's health and safety obligations under the Health and Safety in Employment Act 1992 and the collective agreement required provision of separate ablution/change facilities
  3. 3 Whether the Employment Court's factual findings as to safety were unsupported by evidence

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was dismissed because the proposed grounds failed to disclose any genuinely arguable question of law or prospects of success: on the facts (Asure never provided facilities, AFFCO controlled facilities, shared facilities common) there was no basis to imply a contractual term and no error in the Employment Court's safety findings.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed; appellants ordered to pay costs and usual disbursements.

Orders

  • Leave to appeal dismissed.
  • Appellants to pay respondent costs of $1,500 and usual disbursements.