WHITE V THE RESERVE BANK OF NEW ZEALAND COA CA150/2012
The Court granted leave to appeal on the two identified questions, concluding that there were arguable errors by the Employment Court concerning the application of orthodox contractual interpretation (specifically the effect of 'unless otherwise agreed in writing' and the consideration of implied obligations of good...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- COA CA150/2012
- Parties
- Applicant: Bruce White; Applicant: Ian Harrison; Applicant: Peter Katz; Applicant: Peter Ledingham; Applicant: David Archer; Respondent: The Reserve Bank of New Zealand
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Jurisdiction
- New Zealand
- Judgment Date
- 15 June 2012
- Procedural Posture
- Application for Leave to Appeal / Court of Appeal Leave Hearing
- Outcome
- Leave to appeal granted on the specified questions
- Legal Topics
- Contractual Interpretation, Good Faith in Employment, Remuneration Structure, Superannuation Base Determination
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Bruce White
Applicant
Ian Harrison
Applicant
Peter Katz
Applicant
Peter Ledingham
Applicant
David Archer
Applicant
The Reserve Bank of New Zealand
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal / Court of Appeal Leave Hearing
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Employment Court failed to apply orthodox principles of contractual interpretation by disregarding the words 'unless otherwise agreed in writing' and by failing to consider implied matters arising from past dealings and obligations of good faith in employment contracts
- 2 Whether the respondent was required to periodically review and adjust the percentage of the total remuneration package treated as superable salary in light of material revealed by such reviews
Ratio Decidendi
The Court granted leave to appeal on the two identified questions, concluding that there were arguable errors by the Employment Court concerning the application of orthodox contractual interpretation (specifically the effect of 'unless otherwise agreed in writing' and the consideration of implied obligations of good faith and past dealings) and that the question whether the respondent was required to periodically review and adjust the percentage of remuneration treated as superable salary is a matter properly determined on appeal.
Court Disposition
Leave to appeal granted on the specified questions
Orders
- Leave to appeal granted on questions concerning contractual interpretation and the obligation to review superable salary percentage
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
WHITE V THE RESERVE BANK OF NEW ZEALAND COA CA150/2012 [15 June 2012]IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALANDCA150/2012[2012] NZCA 254BETWEEN BRUCE WHITE, IAN HARRISON,PETER KATZ, PETER LEDINGHAMAND DAVID ARCHERApplicantsAND THE RESERVE BANK OF NEWZEALANDRespondentHearing: 12 June 2012Court: Glazebrook, Randerson and Wild JJCounsel: I R Millard QC for ApplicantsP C Chemis and J B Opie for RespondentJudgment: 15 June 2012 at 2.30 pmJUDGMENT OF THE COURTThe application for leave to appeal is granted on the questions:1. Did the Employment Court fail to apply orthodox interpretationprinciples by failing to take into account the words "unless otherwise agreed in writing" in the applicants' employment contracts and byfailing to consider what was implicit in those words against the background of past dealings and the obligations of good faith that arise in the context of an employment contract?2. If the answer to question one is yes, was the respondent required periodically to review the percentage of the total remuneration package that was deemed to be superable salary and to adjust the percentage having regard to the material revealed by the review?Solicitors:Buddle Findlay, Wellington for Respondent