| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | AA 102/08 |
| Hearing date | 17 Mar 2008 |
| Determination date | 18 March 2008 |
| Member | R Arthur |
| Representation | K Burson ; J Douglas |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Curtis v Computer Engineering Ltd |
| Summary | PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - Admissibility of evidence - Parties and their representatives held “without prejudice” discussions - Applicant sought to have counsel’s notes admitted and for Authority to hear evidence from applicant and counsel - Applicant wanted to use evidence to establish binding agreement made during discussions as would support application for compliance order - Applicant claimed without prejudice material admissible to prove existence of agreement - Respondent argued discussions protected by privilege so not admissible - Argued if Authority did admit evidence should be limited to information relevant to whether agreement reached - Authority found exception to general “without prejudice rule” for material related to issue of whether settlement reached applied to present situation - Authority found interests of justice required investigation of without prejudice discussions to determine whether agreement reached - Respondent’s argument that discussions attracted same level of confidentiality as provided in statutory scheme for mediation rejected - However, Authority accepted respondent’s argument that if evidence admitted should be limited to material relevant to whether agreement reached - Authority satisfied content of discussions, and any written or oral evidence of it relevant to whether agreement reached not subject to privilege for purpose of considering compliance order application - Evidence admissible |
| Result | Orders made ; No order for costs |
| Main Category | Practice & Procedure |
| Statutes | ERA s148;ERA s149 |
| Cases Cited | Bayliss Sharr & Hansen v McDonald [2006] ERNZ 1058;Cutts v Head [1984] 1 All ER 597;New Zealand Air Line Pilots' IUOW Inc v Air Nelson Limited [1998] 3 ERNZ 332;Rush & Tompkins Limited v Greater London Council [1988] 3 All ER 737 |
| Number of Pages | 5 |
| PDF File Link: | aa 102_08.pdf [pdf 23 KB] |