| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | AA 147/10 |
| Determination date | 26 March 2010 |
| Member | K J Anderson |
| Representation | L J Yukich ; G Service |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Electrical Union Inc & Ors v Transfield Services Ltd |
| Summary | COSTS - Unsuccessful bargaining claims - One day investigation meeting - Respondent sought $10,000 contribution plus disbursements to total costs in excess of $25,000 - Respondent acknowledged costs high for one day investigation meeting but claimed three lawyers had to work on preparation of case due to its urgent nature - Claimed matter warranted departure from daily tariff due to high level of preparation, detail of statements of evidence and supporting documents as well as further evidence having to be produced subsequent to investigation meeting - Applicants acknowledged daily tariff approach - Claimed due to nature of dispute case was more about assisting parties than determining winners and losers - Claimed costs should lie where they fall - Found no reason to depart from daily tariff approach with discretion to increase or decrease award - Found despite urgency, respondent’s costs high - Applicants’ claim costs should not follow the event rejected, especially as applicants' withdrew from consultation process and pursued litigation at first instance - Found in all circumstances award of $4,000 costs plus disbursements appropriate |
| Result | Costs in favour of respondent ($4,000) ; Disbursements in favour of respondent ($412.59) |
| Main Category | Costs |
| Cases Cited | Electrical Union Inc and Ors v Transfield Services (New Zealand) Ltd unreported, K Anderson, 20 Oct 2009, AA 369/09;PBO Ltd (formerly Rush Security Ltd) v Da Cruz [2005] 1 ERNZ 808 |
| Number of Pages | 3 |
| PDF File Link: | aa 147_10.pdf [pdf 12 KB] |