| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Wellington |
| Reference No | WA 85/06 |
| Determination date | 07 June 2006 |
| Member | V Campbell |
| Representation | R Foitzik ; G Ogilvie |
| Location | Wellington |
| Parties | Greening v About Demolition & Contracting (2003) Ltd |
| Summary | PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - Application to reopen investigation - Authority had dismissed applicant's personal grievance claim and respondent's breach of contract counterclaim - Before substantive determination issued applicant lodged formal complaint with Chief of Authority about conduct of investigation meeting but did not challenge substantive determination - Separate determination awarded costs to respondent - Costs determination subject to challenge by applicant - Applicant alleged Authority biased and wrong on fact and on law - Claimed respondent received favourable costs determination as result of Authority's bias - Applicant stated that until received costs determination she was happy and relieved matter finalised - Seemed to Authority that it was costs determination which applicant was most unhappy about and she had challenged that determination - Nothing in substantive determination required to be put right - Application to reopen declined |
| Result | Application dismissed ; No order for costs |
| Statutes | ERA Second Schedule cl4(1) |
| Cases Cited | About Demolition & Contracting (2003) Ltd v Greening unreported, GJ Wood, 17 January 2006, WA 4/06;About Demolition & Contracting (2003) Ltd v Greening unreported, GJ Wood, 17 January 2006, WA 4A/06 |
| Number of Pages | 4 |
| PDF File Link: | wa 85_06.pdf [pdf 18 KB] |