| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | AA 280/10 |
| Determination date | 11 June 2010 |
| Member | J Wilson |
| Representation | S King ; B Scott |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Flight Attendants & Services (NZ) Associaiton v Pacific Blue Employment & Crewing Ltd |
| Summary | COSTS - Dispute answered in favour of respondent - Matter determined on the papers - Respondent sought full costs of $9,623 - Respondent claimed need not have incurred costs if applicant had taken reasonable and constructive approach to matters of representation, rather than litigious one - Applicant claimed costs should lie where they fall - Claimed outcome beneficial and useful to both parties - Claimed unions should not be dissuaded from seeking such applications through applications to Authority by possibility costs will be awarded against them - Authority found respondent entitled to contribution to costs - Found even though questions posed by applicant novel, respondent’s costs high for relatively straightforward case - Found no preparation of witness statements or attendance at an investigation meeting required - Applicant to pay respondent $750 contribution to costs |
| Result | Costs in favour of respondent ($750) |
| Main Category | Costs |
| Cases Cited | Flight Attendants & Related Services (NZ) Association v Pacific Blue Employment & Crewing Ltd unreported, J Wilson, 4 Mar 2010, AA 98/10;PBO Ltd (formerly Rush Security Ltd) v Da Cruz [2005] 1 ERNZ 808 |
| Number of Pages | 3 |
| PDF File Link: | aa 280_10.pdf [pdf 17 KB] |