The matter had been set down for a five-day hearing from July 11 and Ms Emmerson was directed to file evidence, including about her ability to be reinstated, her personal health and professional certification to resume practice.
In her application to move the case to the Employment Court, Ms Emmerson argued the matter was of such urgency that it was in the public interest that it be heard by the court. Cases usually only go to the higher court after being heard by the ERA.
ERA member Tania Tetitaha said an important question of law might arise if resolution could affect large numbers of employers or employees or both, and if the consequences were of major significance to employment law.
Ms Tetitaha said issues of public welfare in the prescribing practices at Whangarei Hospital were more appropriately dealt with by the Health and Disability Commissioner and the Medical Council of New Zealand.
Since Ms Emmerson had complained to the Ministry of Health, she said it was more appropriate for that body to address any such issues.
Ms Tetitaha said the former doctor's case may be given an oral determination and was likely to be resolved more quickly in the ERA then by being moved to the Employment Court.
She said Ms Emmerson was yet to file information directed at identifying the dates and events that gave rise to the unjustified disadvantages.
Ms Tetitaha declined to exercise her discretion to move the matter for a number of reasons. Parliament had intended the ERA deal with a number of questions of disputed fact, the matter was part heard and was set to resume in July, and an oral determination might be given, she said.