| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | AA 24A/07 |
| Hearing date | 2 Mar 2007 |
| Determination date | 02 March 2007 |
| Member | L Robinson |
| Representation | P Muir ; B Edwards |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Douglas v Hames Sharley International Ltd |
| Summary | COSTS - Successful compliance order and penalty - Application dealt with on papers - Applicant sought full costs of $12,376, plus disbursements - Submitted respondent on notice full costs would be claimed if record of settlement not complied with by given date - Claimed notice was Calderbank offer - Also alleged respondent's delays and ongoing refusal to comply added considerably to costs - Respondent argued award of $1,000 appropriate and notice letter of demand, not Calderbank offer - Notice not regarded as Calderbank offer by Authority as not kept open for sufficient time - Settlement clear and required no more than performance by parties - Respondent always on notice that ran real risk of ultimately being called to meet costs of default , especially as non-compliance deliberate - Applicant should not have had to pay to compel respondent to do what it voluntarily agreed in good faith to do - Something approaching indemnity costs called for - Contribution of $10,000 appropriate |
| Result | Costs in favour of applicant ($10,000) |
| Main Category | Costs |
| Cases Cited | Binnie v Pacific Health Ltd [2002] 1 ERNZ 438 (CA);Wellington Racing Club Inc v Welch [2002] 1 ERNZ 685 |
| Number of Pages | 3 |
| PDF File Link: | aa 24a_07.pdf [pdf 21 KB] |