| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | AA 153A/09 |
| Determination date | 20 August 2009 |
| Member | M Urlich |
| Representation | T Tran ; M Beech, S Grice |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Pillay v Radius Security Ltd |
| Summary | COSTS - Authority concluded lacked jurisdiction as applicant not employee - One day investigation meeting - Respondent sought $4,000 contribution to total costs of over $26,000 - Respondent claimed costs award at upper end of Authority’s notional daily rate appropriate as applicant failed to supply requested information and filed further evidence after investigation meeting - Applicant claimed costs award should be based on appropriate notional daily rate - Authority found application not frivolous - Found only unusual feature was process for provision of relevant documents requiring Authority intervention - Found matter involved application of settled law following straightforward factual inquiry - Respondent entitled to $3,000 contribution to costs |
| Result | Costs in favour of respondent ($3,000) |
| Main Category | Costs |
| Statutes | ERA Second Schedule cl15 |
| Cases Cited | PBO Ltd (formerly Rush Security Ltd) v Da Cruz [2005] 1 ERNZ 808;Pillay v Radius Security Ltd unreported, M Urlich, 14 May 2009, AA 153/09;Terson Industries Ltd v Loder unreported, Shaw J, 30 Apr 2009, WC 10/09 |
| Number of Pages | 2 |
| PDF File Link: | aa 153a_09.pdf [pdf 15 KB] |