| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | AA 91/08 |
| Determination date | 13 March 2008 |
| Member | M Urlich |
| Representation | A Sharp ; A Clemow |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Stiekema v Centurion Management Services Ltd |
| Summary | COSTS - Successful personal grievance - 1ï¾½ day investigation meeting - Applicant sought contribution of $5,000 to total costs of $15,862 plus disbursements - Argued particular weight should be given to settlement offer, and claim was successful in area which applicant placed particular importance - Respondent sought contribution to costs of $1,500 - Claimed applicant raised two issues which had little prospect of success, doubling the hearing time and inconveniencing witnesses - Alleged determination did not vindicate applicant and it's counter offer to applicants Calderbank offer should be considered - Respondent also sought witness costs - Basis of claim unclear as witness appeared as consequence of Authority subpoena, not called by respondent - Authority found neither settlement proposals reasonable - Applicant had degree of success therefore costs to follow event - Applicant is entitled to contribution to costs |
| Result | Costs in favour of applicant ($3,000) ; Disbursements ($200) |
| Main Category | Costs |
| Statutes | ERA Second Schedule cl15 |
| Cases Cited | Stiekema v Centurion Management Services Ltd unreported, M Urlich, 3 December 2007, AA 377/07;PBO Ltd(formerly Rush Security Ltd) v Da Cruz [2005] 1 ERNZ 808;Watson v NZ electrical Traders Ltd t/a Bray Switchgear unreported, Colgan CJ, 24 November 2006, AC 64/06 |
| Number of Pages | 3 |
| PDF File Link: | aa 91_08.pdf [pdf 24 KB] |