| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch |
| Reference No | [2012] NZERA Christchurch 192 |
| Determination date | 03 September 2012 |
| Member | H Doyle |
| Representation | B Nevell ; J Farrow |
| Location | Christchurch |
| Parties | Gray v Murrays Veterinary Clinic Ltd |
| Summary | PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Admissibility of evidence – Respondent claimed letter from respondent’s counsel to applicant’s former counsel inadmissible as created for mediation purposes – Authority found not implicit in letter that written for mediation purposes – Found normal practice to respond to raising of personal grievance and expectation letter would make clear on its face if written for mediation purposes – Letter admissible with exception of paragraphs specified by Authority |
| Abstract | Respondent claimed letter from respondent’s counsel (“F”) to applicant’s former counsel (“K”) inadmissible as created for mediation purposes. K raised personal grievance on behalf of applicant and suggested parties attend mediation. F replied respondent willing to attend mediation and stated F would provide comprehensive response to matters in K’s letter at later date. After mediation date set F sent promised response (“letter”). K replied would not be preparing for mediation for several days and had not read F’s letter for mediation. Respondent claimed letter inadmissible.;AUTHORITY FOUND –;PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE: Letter provided what could be seen as substantive response to applicant’s personal grievance and no mention in letter written for different purpose. Not implicit in letter that written for mediation purposes. Normal practice to respond to raising of personal grievance and expectation letter would make clear on its face if written for mediation purposes. K’s statement had not read letter for mediation ambiguous and unable to establish K knew letter prepared for mediation purposes. Letter not created for mediation purposes. Letter admissible with exception of paragraphs specified by Authority. |
| Result | Application partially granted; Orders made; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Practice & Procedure |
| Statutes | ERA s148(1);ERA s148(3);ERA s148(6);ERA s148(6)(a) |
| Cases Cited | Just Hotel Ltd v Jesudhass [2007] ERNZ 817; [2008] 2 NZLR 210 |
| Number of Pages | 7 |
| PDF File Link: | 2012_NZERA_Christchurch_192.pdf [pdf 153 KB] |