| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch |
| Reference No | CA 88A/06 |
| Determination date | 14 July 2006 |
| Member | H Doyle |
| Representation | A Webber ; R Searle |
| Location | Christchurch |
| Parties | Muollo v Punt Painting and Waterblasting Ltd |
| Summary | COSTS - Successful personal grievance - Less than one day investigation meeting - Previous offers of $2,000 and $2,500 to settle costs rejected - Applicant submitted incurred costs in excess of $8,000 - Claimed Authority should award greater than normal costs for one day hearing - Investigation meeting adjourned because of respondents circumstances - Applicant claimed return travel to Australia should be allowed as disbursement - Respondent submitted reasons why award taken into account - Respondent had limited ability to pay costs - Applicant only reimbursed for necessary expenditure - Adjournment inevitable and Investigation meeting was not only reason for applicants travel - Respondent ordered to pay appropriate costs of $2,500 |
| Result | Costs in favour of applicant ($2,500) |
| Cases Cited | PBO Ltd(formerly Rush Security Ltd) v Da Cruz [2005] 1 ERNZ 808 |
| Number of Pages | 2 |
| PDF File Link: | ca 88a_06.pdf [pdf 10 KB] |