| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch |
| Reference No | [2012] NZERA Christchurch 254 |
| Determination date | 22 November 2012 |
| Member | H Doyle |
| Representation | G Cooper ; C Corlett |
| Parties | Miller v Springfree New Zealand Ltd and Anor |
| Summary | COSTS – Successful practice and procedure claim and jurisdiction counterclaim – Length of investigation meeting not specified – Second respondent sought indemnity costs of $2,788 – Authority found no reason to depart from principle costs follow event given second respondent’s successful protest to jurisdiction – Found reduction in daily tariff appropriate to reflect fact investigation meeting would not have taken half day if confined to second respondent’s protest to jurisdiction – Applicant to pay second respondent $1,350 contribution towards costs – Costs relating to determination between applicant and first respondent reserved |
| Result | Costs in favour of second respondent ($1,350) |
| Main Category | Costs |
| Cases Cited | Graham v Airways Corp of New Zealand Ltd [2004] 1 ERNZ 564;PBO Ltd (formerly Rush Security Ltd) v Da Cruz [2005] ERNZ 808 |
| Number of Pages | 5 |
| PDF File Link: | 2012_NZERA_Christchurch_254.pdf [pdf 96 KB] |