| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | AA 146A/10 |
| Determination date | 22 June 2010 |
| Member | K J Anderson |
| Representation | R Young (in person) ; M Beech, A Scott |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Young v Bay of Plenty District Health Board |
| Summary | COSTS - Unsuccessful personal grievance - Two and a half day investigation meeting - Respondent sought $25,500 contribution to costs - Respondent claimed substantial delay in applicant progressing claim - Claimed had applicant accepted behaviour during and after employment unacceptable investigation meeting would not have been needed - Claimed investigation meeting unduly protracted due to manner applicant conduct case - Claimed applicant rejected respondent’s settlement offers - Claimed case important to respondent as applicant sought reinstatement and number of staff had made confidential disclosures would resign if applicant reinstated - Applicant claimed necessary to pursue case given respondent’s actions - Applicant claimed should be awarded $27,000 contribution to costs - Authority accepted investigation meeting unduly protracted due to applicant’s conduct - However, found no reason to depart from daily tariff approach - Applicant to pay respondent $7,500 contribution to costs |
| Result | Costs in favour of respondent ($7,500) |
| Main Category | Costs |
| Cases Cited | Heffernan v Estate of Patrick David Heffernan unreported, P Cheyne, 23 Jun 2006, CA 59A/06;PBO Ltd (formerly Rush Security Ltd) v Da Cruz [2005] 1 ERNZ 808 |
| Number of Pages | 3 |
| PDF File Link: | aa 146a_10.pdf [pdf 15 KB] |