Restrictions OK
Jurisdiction Employment Relations Authority - Auckland
Reference No AA 43/09
Hearing date 11 Feb 2009
Determination date 11 February 2009
Member G J Wood
Representation D Collins ; D Bahadur
Location Auckland
Parties Devi v APNA Networks Ltd
Summary PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - Application for adjournment and leave to respond out of time - Respondent failed to lodge statement in reply - Informed by Minute would need to apply for leave - At investigation meeting applicant sought leave to respond out of time and for adjournment - Respondent’s secretary (“B”) claimed correspondence left unattended on desk, had been away from work for a time and then had been ill and believed application for leave could be made on day - B gave evidence respondent had substantive defences to applicant’s claims and could have grounds for counterclaim - Applicant opposed both applications on grounds respondent had sufficient staff able to deal with matter and had plenty of opportunity to engage with her representative and Authority - Authority concluded respondent’s lack of response constituted failure to facilitate Authority’s investigation and had potential consequences under s181 and s182 Employment Relations Act 2000 - Found lack of response unacceptable and method of dealing with important legal matters unprofessional - However, found in interest of justice to grant applications - Found otherwise respondent unable to defend matter at all, yet could have substantive defences - Authority gave B benefit of doubt that only been able to attend to matter very recently - Found was some ambiguity about when respondent should apply for leave in Minute - Found respondent paid applicant’s expenses as result of there being an adjournment - Authority made directions as to date of next investigation meeting and date for filing statements
Result Applications granted ; Orders made ; No order for costs
Main Category Practice & Procedure
Statutes ERA s181;ERA s182
Number of Pages 2
PDF File Link: aa 43_09.pdf [pdf 22 KB]