| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | AA 156A/09 |
| Determination date | 31 August 2009 |
| Member | M Urlich |
| Representation | S Mitchell ; P Muir, K Burson |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Maritime Union of New Zealand v C3 Ltd |
| Summary | COSTS - Unsuccessful practice and procedure claim - Less than one day investigation meeting - Respondent sought $10,000 contribution to total costs of over $23,000 - Respondent claimed applicant had sought urgency restricting preparation time - Claimed applicant knew corporate structure and produced no evidence to show sham or fa�ade - Applicant claimed award of no more than $1,000 appropriate - Claimed investigation meeting short and issues resolved promptly - Claimed application not vexatious or frivolous - Claimed improper for Authority to make higher than usual costs award because respondent's costs high - Authority found costs award warranted - Found issues significant and unusual involving inquiry into structure of parent company and its subsidiaries and legitimacy of structure - Found reasonable for greater than usual level of costs to be incurred - Found usual tariff should be adjusted upwards - Given significance of issues to parties and hearing time applicant to pay respondent $3,000 contribution to costs |
| Result | Costs in favour of respondent ($3,000) ; Disbursements in favour of respondent ($808.89) |
| Main Category | Costs |
| Statutes | ERA Second Schedule cl15 |
| Cases Cited | Chief Executive, Department of Corrections v Tawhiwhirangi (No 2) [2008] ERNZ 73;PBO Ltd (formerly Rush Security Ltd) v Da Cruz [2005] 1 ERNZ 808 |
| Number of Pages | 3 |
| PDF File Link: | aa 156a_09.pdf [pdf 24 KB] |