| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | AA 281/10 |
| Determination date | 14 June 2010 |
| Member | R A Monaghan |
| Representation | G Service ; A Drake |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Sullivan v AGM Publishing Ltd & Anor |
| Other Parties | Inkpen |
| Summary | COSTS – Respondents sought full indemnity costs of $26,315 against applicant following withdrawal of employment relationship problem – Respondent claimed applicant’s case without merit, failed to provide particulars, wilfully disregarded Authority’s jurisdiction in naming second respondent as party to employment relationship problem and delay – Applicant filed employment relationship problem alleging second respondent made disparaging comments in breach of settlement agreement – First respondent sought particulars claiming particulars necessary for mediation - First respondent opposed Authority’s jurisdiction to deal with claim against second respondent – Parties negotiated to resolve employment relationship problem – Applicant withdrew problem – Authority found applicant’s case not unmeritorious – Found if allegations proved, applicant may be able to establish breach of settlement agreement – Found first respondent’s persistence for particulars from witness prior to mediation premature and unduly formal – Found first respondent had sufficient information to attempt resolution in mediation – Found first respondent went too far claiming applicant wilfully disregarded Authority’s jurisdiction – Found legal authority to support at least tenable cause of action against second respondent – Found delay explained by applicant and nothing to show how delay added to costs – Found overall, sum claimed out of proportion to factual simplicity of issue – Found although applicant’s representative took aggressive approach which caused respondents to respond in kind, no full indemnity costs would have been awarded in any event – Found $500 global award for costs appropriate given problem withdrawn without agreement as to costs – Respondents to determine how costs allocated – Costs in favour of respondent |
| Result | Costs in favour of respondent ($500)(Global award) |
| Main Category | Costs |
| Statutes | ERA s149;ERA s149(1);ERA s159(2) |
| Cases Cited | Bradbury v Westpac Banking Corporation [2009] 3 NZLR 40;Musa v Whanganui District Health Board and Anor unreported, Shaw J, 18 Nov 2008, WC 20/08;Postles v Airways Corporation of New Zealand Limited (No 2) [2002] 2 ERNZ 817 |
| Number of Pages | 7 |
| PDF File Link: | aa 281_10.pdf [pdf 22 KB] |