| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch |
| Reference No | CA 60/09 |
| Determination date | 08 May 2009 |
| Member | P Cheyne |
| Representation | No appearance ; M Kirk |
| Location | Christchurch |
| Parties | Bickley v Halifax Vet Ltd |
| Summary | COSTS – No appearance by applicant – Unsuccessful personal grievance – Authority found costs not to be used as punishment – Found award to be modest – Respondent as wholly successful party sought $3,000 contribution to costs – Authority found claim for costs reasonable in light of matter taking just over one day – Claim for costs awarded in full – Authority found claim for interest on costs outside power of Authority – Authority found compliance order sought by respondent unavailable because parties only before Authority on reserved question of costs – Found fresh application for compliance order would be required |
| Result | Costs in favour of respondent ($3,000) |
| Main Category | Costs |
| Statutes | ERA s137(1)(b);ERA s137(2) |
| Cases Cited | PBO Ltd (formerly Rush Security Ltd) v Da Cruz [2005] 1 ERNZ 808 |
| Number of Pages | 3 |
| PDF File Link: | ca 60_09.pdf [pdf 16 KB] |