| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch |
| Reference No | CA 6C/10 |
| Determination date | 26 October 2010 |
| Member | J Crichton |
| Representation | J Goldstein ; P Zwart |
| Location | Christchurch |
| Parties | Service v Young Men's Christian Association of Christchurch Inc |
| Summary | COSTS - Successful interim reinstatement application - Successful personal grievance - Length of investigation meetings not specified - Applicant sought $16,000 contribution to total costs of $22,500 - Applicant claimed costs as wholly successful in both applications - Applicant claimed Calderbank offer made to respondent should be considered - Respondent sought costs on basis of two Calderbank offers made to applicant - Respondent claimed first offer should be considered as proposed far greater benefits than those awarded in Authority - Claimed should also be considered because applicant did not enforce grant of interim reinstatement - Found respondent unsuccessful party and not proper exercise of discretion to consider Calderbank offer - Found also offer did not address applicant’s fundamental concern at time offer made, namely reinstatement - Found not appropriate to take first Calderbank offer into account in fixing costs - Respondent claimed second Calderbank offer should be considered - Found applicant better off as consequence of Authority’s determination than would have been if accepted second offer - Found second Calderbank offer not to be taken into consideration - Found while compensation proposed in applicant’s Calderbank offer greatly in excess of amount awarded, offer did not discuss reimbursement of lost wages - Found effect of reimbursement of lost wages and compensation awarded in Authority close to amount sought in offer - Found applicant’s Calderbank offer to be considered - Authority found applicant’s costs reasonable and reasonable incurred - Found matter not straight forward - Found matter complex and challenging - Found in all circumstances award of $15,000 costs appropriate - Respondent to pay applicant $15,000 contribution to costs |
| Result | Costs in favour of applicant ($15,000) |
| Main Category | Costs |
| Cases Cited | Allan v Ogilvy Wellington Ltd unreported, J Crichton, 24 Apr 2009, WA 50/09;Begley v Cropmark Seeds Ltd unreported, J Crichton, 7 Dec 2009, CA 168A/09;Graham v Airways Corporation of New Zealand Ltd unreported, A Dumbleton, 28 Jan 2004, AA 39/04;PBO Ltd (formerly Rush Security Ltd) v Da Cruz [2005] 1 ERNZ 808;Watson v New Zealand Electrical Traders Ltd t/a Bray Switchgear unreported, Colgan CJ, 24 Nov 2006, AC 64/06 |
| Number of Pages | 6 |
| PDF File Link: | ca 6c_10.pdf [pdf 26 KB] |