| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch |
| Reference No | [2011] NZERA Christchurch 163 |
| Determination date | 25 October 2011 |
| Member | H Doyle |
| Representation | L Lambie-Shaw ; P Brown |
| Location | Christchurch |
| Parties | Fulton v Canstaff Ltd and Anor |
| Other Parties | Canstaff Ashburton Ltd |
| Summary | COSTS – Withdrawn application to reopen investigation – No investigation meeting – Respondents sought $750 contribution to $1,000 total costs – Applicant claimed costs should lie where they fall – Respondents claimed no merit in application – Second respondent advised not in position to pay applicant awards made by Authority – Authority found respondents did incur costs as statement in reply lodged, attended telephone conference and corresponded with applicant – Found unusual for second respondent to seek costs given spent in excess of $750 opposing application for someone else to assume liability after claim unable to pay applicant awards made by Authority – Found award of costs would simply be set off against much larger amounts owed to applicant – Costs to lie where they fall |
| Result | Costs to lie where they fall |
| Main Category | Costs |
| Number of Pages | 4 |
| PDF File Link: | 2011_NZERA_Christchurch_163.pdf [pdf 17 KB] |