| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Wellington |
| Reference No | WA 64/10 |
| Determination date | 12 March 2010 |
| Member | P R Stapp |
| Location | Wellington |
| Parties | Weko v Tegel New Zealand Ltd |
| Summary | PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - Application for joinder - Respondent sought to join New Zealand Amalgamated Engineering Printing and Manufacturing Union (“EPMU”) to costs application as sought contribution to costs - EPMU represented applicant throughout proceedings - EPMU gave undertaking as to damages at interim reinstatement hearing - EPMU opposed application and sought $1,000 costs - EPMU claimed not a party to personal grievance and could not be liable for costs - EPMU accepted legal representative could be joined as party to application for costs in certain exceptional circumstances - However, claimed no evidence that EPMU’s conduct responsible for respondent incurring costs - Claimed applicant exercising right to representation and EPMU entitled to provide that representation - EPMU claimed respondent failed to produce any admissible evidence to support finding EPMU responsible in whole or part for respondent’s costs - EPMU claimed all reasonable steps taken to ensure applicant properly represented - Authority declined to join EPMU to proceedings for following reasons - EPMU not a party to personal grievance proceedings - EPMU acting as representative in accordance with Employment Relations Act 2000 - Found nothing to suggest EPMU not acting genuinely and properly - Cases cited by respondent distinguishable or involved different facts - Found EPMU did take all reasonable steps to put applicant on notice of responsibilities and risk that costs award could be made against him - Found as EPMU not party and representing applicant not prepared to award costs in its favour for cost of submission opposing joinder application - Application declined - COSTS - Unsuccessful interim reinstatement application - Less than half a day investigation meeting - Unsuccessful personal grievance – Length of investigation meeting not specified - No appearance for applicant at investigation meeting - Respondent sought substantial contribution to total costs of $12,029 - No costs submissions received from applicant - Found respondent successful and costs to follow the event - Found respondent’s Calderbank offer not directly applicable but could be taken into account - Authority satisfied respondent took all reasonable steps to try and avoid costs - Applicant to pay $8,000 contribution to respondent’s costs |
| Result | Costs in favour of respondent ($8,000) |
| Main Category | Costs |
| Statutes | ERA s18;ERA s221(a);ERA s236 |
| Cases Cited | NZ Medical Laboratory Workers Union Inc v Capital Coast Health Limited [1998] 2 ERNZ 107;O’Conner v AMTEC Engineering Group Limited unreported RA Monaghan, 20 Oct 2004, WA 104A/04;O’Malley v Vision Aluminium Ltd No 3 [1992] 2 ERNZ 1043;Unkovich v Air New Zealand Limited [1995] 1 ERNZ 336 |
| Number of Pages | 7 |
| PDF File Link: | wa 64_10.pdf [pdf 35 KB] |