| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | AA 131/08 |
| Hearing date | 4 Apr 2008 |
| Determination date | 07 April 2008 |
| Member | L Robinson |
| Representation | SR Von Tunzelman (in person) ; G Bogiatto |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Von Tunzelman v Taylor |
| Summary | COMPLIANCE ORDER - Applicant sought compliance with Authority determinations - Respondent had challenged previous determination - Submitted more appropriate method of resolving dispute - Authority did not agree there was dispute so as to place in doubt appropriateness of order for compliance - Only first determination challenged - Although if challenge successful likely second determination impeachable, fact made respondent's argument of alternative remedy not sustainable - Respondent also claimed financial position meant unable to pay and submitted applicant's attempts to enforce determinations in District Court militated against exercising discretion to order compliance in his favour - Respondent did not satisfactorily explain why stay of proceedings not sought - Fact determinations challenged a neutral factor - Respondent had not complied with earlier determinations - Authority not persuaded to exercise discretion not to order compliance - Compliance ordered |
| Result | Compliance ordered ; Disbursements in favour of applicant ($70) |
| Main Category | Compliance Order |
| Cases Cited | von Tunzelman v Taylor & Anor unreported, L Robinson, 9 July 2007, AA 206/07;von Tunzelman v Taylor & Anor unreported, L Robinson, 13 August 2007, AA 206A/07 |
| Number of Pages | 4 |
| PDF File Link: | aa 131_08.pdf [pdf 20 KB] |