| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch |
| Reference No | CA 85/08 |
| Determination date | 25 June 2008 |
| Member | J Wilson |
| Representation | A McKenzie ; P Shaw |
| Location | Christchurch |
| Parties | Watson v Canterbury District Health Board |
| Summary | COSTS - Withdrawal of application prior to determination following one day investigation meeting - Respondent filed late costs submission due to oversight by respondent's representation - Argued applicant already on notice that costs would be sought and matter already drawn out so further debate on issue would further delay final resolution - Applicant argued that as no costs submission was received by designated date the Authority was 'functus officio' - Also argued respondent's failure to remedy lateness meant application fatally flawed - Authority dismissed applicant's argument, accepting respondent's costs submission but allowed for additional costs incurred by lateness of costs submission - Respondent sought full indemnity costs of $11,700 as applicant acted in vexatious and unreasonable manner - Applicant argued costs should lie where they fall - Argued in absence of substantive determination would be impossible to determine costs - Submitted respondent's conduct contributed to level of costs incurred - Applicant also in dire financial position expending money in effort to retain employment - Respondent entitled to usual modest costs award - Applicant to pay contribution of $1,500 to respondent's costs |
| Result | Costs in favour of respondent ($1,500) |
| Main Category | Costs |
| Statutes | ERA s221;ERA s221(c) |
| Cases Cited | PBO Ltd (formerly Rush Security Ltd) v Da Cruz [2005] 1 ERNZ 808 |
| Number of Pages | 5 |
| PDF File Link: | ca 85_08.pdf [pdf 21 KB] |