| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch |
| Reference No | CA 30/04 |
| Determination date | 25 March 2004 |
| Member | P Montgomery |
| Representation | M Bell ; O Paulsen |
| Location | Christchurch |
| Parties | Goodger v Gifford-Jones |
| Summary | COSTS - Authority had directed applications be withdrawn and refiled citing correct respondent - Incorrectly cited respondent sought costs of $984 for preparing and filing statements in reply - Applicants' counsel gave respondent opportunity to correctly identify employer - Respondent filing full statements knowing not employer defied commonsense - To then seek costs to correct applicants' understandable error excessively hopeful - No costs awarded in favour of incorrectly named respondent - Applicants counterclaimed for costs against correct respondent in sum of 2/3rds of $1,440 plus disbursements - Applicants put to considerable avoidable costs by behaviour of respondent's principals but correct respondent different entity from incorrectly named respondent and could not be regarded as party to action - Though disquieted by behaviour costs to lie where they fall |
| Result | Costs to lie where they fall |
| Number of Pages | 2 |
| PDF File Link: | PDF file not available for download, please contact us to request a copy. |