Selected cases

Employment Court of New Zealand · [2023] NZEmpC 89

A Labour Inspector of the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment v Prisha’s Hospitality (2017) Ltd T/A Royal Cambridge Indian Restaurant

The case underscores the importance of strict compliance with employment laws, especially for businesses employing vulnerable workers.

Employment Court of New Zealand16 June 2023

Plain-English explainers, not legal advice. Use the linked official source for section-level detail, and get advice for your situation.

Get legal help

Start here

Quick read

  • Employers must strictly comply with minimum employment standards, including paying at least minimum wage, providing proper holiday and leave entitlements, and avoiding...
  • This Employment Court case involved two related hospitality companies and their director/shareholders, accused of breaching minimum employment standards for seven...

Use this to check

  • Minimum employment standards must be met for all employees, including migrant workers.
  • Directors and shareholders can be personally liable for breaches if they manage the business.
  • Employers cannot avoid minimum standards by calling workers volunteers.

Decision snapshot

  1. What happened

    • The Labour Inspector brought proceedings against two related companies, Prisha’s Hospitality (2017) Limited (trading as Royal Cambridge Indian Restaurant) and Prisha’s Hospitality Limited (trading as Roquette Restaurant & Bar), as well as their director/shareholders, Ajay Sharma and Kavita Sharma.
    • The claims covered breaches of minimum employment standards for seven former employees, all immigrants from India, some on visas tied to the employer.
    • The period in question was December 2017 to June 2019.
    • The Royal Cambridge Indian Restaurant ceased operations after a fire in December 2018, and the Roquette Restaurant was sold in September 2021.
  2. What the court had to decide

    • The legal issue was whether the companies and their director/shareholders breached minimum employment standards by failing to pay minimum wage, holiday pay, public holiday pay, and by making unlawful deductions and requiring premiums from employees.
    • The Court also considered whether directors/shareholders could be personally liable for these breaches, and whether informal arrangements or classifying workers as volunteers could avoid liability for minimum standards.
  3. What the court decided

    • The Employment Court found that the companies and their director/shareholders breached minimum employment standards.
    • The Court ordered compensation for arrears of wages, annual holiday pay, public holiday pay, and interest.
    • The Court rejected attempts to classify workers as volunteers and found unlawful deductions and premiums had been required.

Practical impact

Practical read

  • Employers must strictly comply with minimum employment standards, including paying at least minimum wage, providing proper holiday and leave entitlements, and avoiding unlawful deductions or requiring premiums from employees.
  • Directors and shareholders who actively manage the business can be personally liable for breaches.
  • This case demonstrates that even informal arrangements or attempts to classify workers as volunteers will not shield employers from liability.
  • The Court will scrutinise employment practices, especially where vulnerable migrant workers are affected, and can order compensation, interest, and penalties for breaches.

Useful next steps

  • Minimum employment standards must be met for all employees, including migrant workers.
  • Directors and shareholders can be personally liable for breaches if they manage the business.
  • Employers cannot avoid minimum standards by calling workers volunteers.
  • Unlawful deductions and requiring premiums from employees are prohibited.
  • Accurate pay and leave records are essential for compliance.

The story

Two related companies, both owned and managed by Ajay Sharma and Kavita Sharma, operated restaurants in Cambridge and Whakatane. They employed several migrant workers from India, some on visas tied to the employer. The Labour Inspector investigated claims that these employees were not paid minimum wage, holiday pay, or public holiday pay, and that unlawful deductions and premiums were required.

The Royal Cambridge Indian Restaurant ceased operations after a fire, and the Roquette Restaurant was later sold. The claims covered a period from December 2017 to June 2019. The Labour Inspector sought declarations of breach, compensation for arrears, and penalties against the companies and their director/shareholders.

Key takeaways

  • Minimum employment standards must be met for all employees, including migrant workers.
  • Directors and shareholders can be personally liable for breaches if they manage the business.
  • Employers cannot avoid minimum standards by calling workers volunteers.
  • Unlawful deductions and requiring premiums from employees are prohibited.
  • Accurate pay and leave records are essential for compliance.

What the Court decided

The Employment Court found that the companies and their director/shareholders breached minimum employment standards. The Court rejected arguments that some workers were volunteers, noting that the actual work performed and arrangements showed they were employees entitled to minimum standards.

The Court ordered compensation for arrears of wages, holiday pay, and public holiday pay, as well as interest. The Court also found unlawful deductions and premiums had been required from employees. Further submissions were required on non-pecuniary loss and penalties, but the judgment confirmed that directors and shareholders could be personally liable for breaches.

How to read this for your business

This case is a warning for business owners, especially in hospitality and sectors employing migrant workers. Minimum employment standards are mandatory and cannot be contracted out of, even by informal arrangements or by calling workers volunteers.

Directors and shareholders who actively manage the business can be personally liable for breaches. Employers must keep accurate records, pay at least minimum wage, provide proper leave entitlements, and avoid unlawful deductions or requiring premiums from employees.

Practical checks for employers

Employers should regularly review their payroll and employment practices. Even if a worker starts informally or is called a volunteer, if they are performing work, they are likely an employee and entitled to minimum standards.

Pay records must be accurate and complete. Any deductions or payments outside normal wages must be lawful and documented. Employers should also ensure that staff on visas are treated fairly and not exploited.

Operating checklist

To avoid breaches and penalties, employers should follow these practical steps:

Common questions

What are minimum employment standards in New Zealand?

Minimum employment standards include paying at least the minimum wage, providing annual and public holiday pay, and not making unlawful deductions or requiring premiums from employees.

Can directors or shareholders be personally liable for employment breaches?

Yes, if they actively manage the business and are involved in breaches, directors and shareholders can be held personally responsible.

Are employers allowed to classify workers as volunteers to avoid paying minimum entitlements?

No, employers cannot avoid minimum standards by calling workers volunteers if they are actually performing work as employees.

What penalties can employers face for breaching minimum employment standards?

Employers can face compensation orders, interest on arrears, and pecuniary penalties. Further penalties may be determined by the Court.

Related topics

How Sprintlaw can help