| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch |
| Reference No | CA 104A/09 |
| Determination date | 11 September 2009 |
| Member | H Doyle |
| Representation | R Frost ; D Creed |
| Location | Christchurch |
| Parties | Creevey v Aimex Ltd |
| Summary | PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Application to reopen investigation – Applicant claimed necessary to reopen investigation to enforce earlier determination against respondent who changed company name without notice to applicant – Authority found respondent changed company name to Vickerman 42 Limited (“VL”) without giving notice – Found VL and respondent same company under new name - Found justice required investigation be reopened to allow applicant to enforce orders – Application to reopen investigation granted - COSTS – Applicant sought costs for distress warrant, and disbursements of costs for company searches and correspondence with respondent, totalling $500 – Authority found costs of distress warrant not within Authority jurisdiction as it was District Court process – Found unclear what costs incurred in obtaining company searches – Authority ordered VL to pay applicant $250 reasonable contribution to costs – Costs in favour of applicant |
| Result | Application granted ; Costs in favour of applicant ($250) |
| Main Category | Practice & Procedure |
| Statutes | ERA cl14, sch2 |
| Cases Cited | Creevey v Aimex Ltd, unreported, Doyle J, 17 Jul 2009, CA 104/09 |
| Number of Pages | 3 |
| PDF File Link: | ca 104a_09.pdf [pdf 13 KB] |