Restrictions OK
Jurisdiction Employment Relations Authority - Wellington
Reference No [2011] NZERA Wellington 94
Determination date 31 May 2011
Member D Asher
Representation K O'Sullivan ; B Scotland
Location Wellington
Parties Temarama v Mana Coach Services Ltd
Summary COSTS - Successful personal grievance - Less than one day investigation meeting - Applicant sought $3,000 contribution to costs - Applicant represented by union official - Applicant claimed successful in claim even though remedies reduced to zero for contributory conduct - Claimed therefore costs should follow the event - Claimed as contributory behaviour taken into account in assessing remedies Authority not entitled to take it into account in determining costs - Respondent claimed applicant provided no evidence of costs incurred beyond filing fee - Claimed would be at odds with equity and good conscience to award costs in case where but for one technical defect dismissal would have been found to be justified - Claimed costs should lie where they fall - Authority did not accept respondent’s submission that breach of collective employment agreement was merely technical breach that could be ignored - Found as dismissal unjustified appropriate that costs follow the event - Found while no evidence of costs provided accepted applicant’s representative paid union official and would have been engaged elsewhere but for representation of applicant - Found therefore was principled approach that union receive contribution to costs - Respondent to pay applicant $500 contribution to costs for reimbursement of union
Result Costs in favour of applicant ($500)
Main Category Costs
Cases Cited Health Waikato Ltd v Elmsly [2004] 1 ERNZ 172;O'Malley v Vision Aluminium Ltd [1992] 2 ERNZ 368;PBO Ltd (formerly Rush Security Ltd) v Da Cruz [2005] ERNZ 808;Temarama v Mana Coach Services Ltd D Asher, 4 Nov 2010, WA 179/10;White v Auckland District Health Board [2008] ERNZ 635
Number of Pages 3
PDF File Link: 2011_NZERA_Wellington_94.pdf [pdf 12 KB]