| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch |
| Reference No | CA 48/10 |
| Determination date | 05 March 2010 |
| Member | P Montgomery |
| Representation | A Sharma ; G Downing |
| Location | Christchurch |
| Parties | Gutsell v Burgess & Crowley Civil Ltd |
| Summary | COSTS - Unsuccessful personal grievance - Less than one day investigation meeting - Respondent sought $4,500 contribution to total costs of $11,305 - Respondent claimed way applicant conducted case increased costs - Claimed allegations applicant raised at late stage required calling rebuttal evidence form additional witnesses which escalated costs - Applicant claimed costs should lie where they fall - Claimed person of limited means who provided for superannuitant wife - Claimed contribution to costs sought would be punitive - Found applicant’s evidence not believable - Found chances of applicant’s case surviving Authority’s scrutiny akin to those of an egg surviving a fall from Nelson Cathedral’s belltower - Found appropriate case for costs to follow the event - Found notional tariff approach applicable - Taking into account costs associated with securing and documenting evidence in rebuttal and applicant’s financial situation $2,600 contribution to costs appropriate - Applicant to pay $2,600 contribution to respondent’s reasonably incurred costs - Parties to agree on time payment arrangement |
| Result | Costs in favour of respondent ($2,600) |
| Main Category | Costs |
| Cases Cited | PBO Ltd (formerly Rush Security Ltd) v Da Cruz [2005] 1 ERNZ 808 |
| Number of Pages | 3 |
| PDF File Link: | ca 48_10.pdf [pdf 16 KB] |