[2024] NZEmpC 46 CTR Roofing Ltd v Cross [pdf, 214 KB]
...conduct, other costs CTR has incurred to date, and the moderate value of the goods and amounts payable under the compliance order. Counsel also notes, as a relevant factor, that Mr Cross was an employee rather than an employer. [16] As the Court of Appeal made clear in Peter Reynolds Mechanical Ltd v Denyer, the primary purpose of the sanctions regime is to secure compliance.6 A further purpose is to impose a sanction for non-compliance. In Peter Reynolds, the Court of Appeal i...