4 Dec 2013
Leave to appeal was granted because the proposed appeal raised questions of law of public importance regarding the proper application of s103A to redundancy dismissals and the principles governing remedial discretion; counsel assisting was appointed due to respondent being unrepresented and costs on the application were reserved.
23 Nov 2010
The Judge erred in finding frustration: although the employer genuinely believed continuation was intolerable, the correct inquiry required examination of the contract's terms (including statutory procedural protections) and whether further performance was impossible or radically different; because the statutory processes could have been followed and it is conceivable the relationship might have been resolved, frustration did not apply and the matter must be remitted to the Employment Court to determine whether any dismissal was justifiable under s103A of the Employment Relations Act 2000.