| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | AA 24A/06 |
| Determination date | 12 May 2006 |
| Member | A Dumbleton |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Matich v Christian Healthcare Trust |
| Summary | COSTS – Successful unjustified dismissal claim – Reinstatement ordered but monetary remedies reduced for contributory conduct – Three day investigation meeting - Applicant represented by counsel on pro bono basis - Sought award of $4,500 plus disbursements of $1,202 – Respondent argued costs should lie where they fall – Pro bono representation did not preclude recovery of costs by applicant - Outcome of grievance ultimately in applicant’s favour but success based on disparity argument rather than finding applicant innocent of misconduct – Applicant could have achieved same result by accepting settlement offers made by respondent prior to investigation meeting – For costs to truly follow the event in current circumstances costs to lie where they fall |
| Result | Costs to lie where they fall |
| Cases Cited | PBO Ltd v Da Cruz unreported, Colgan CJ, Travis, Shaw JJ, 9 December 2005, AC 2A/05 |
| Number of Pages | 3 |
| PDF File Link: | aa 24a_06.pdf [pdf 15 KB] |