The Employment Relations Authority in Christchurch recently made a determination in the case of Aaron Mitchell against Breads of Europe (2015) Limited. In December 2022, the Authority found that Mitchell had experienced two unjustified disadvantage grievances but not a claim for unjustified constructive dismissal. Compensation and reimbursement of limited wages were awarded, but not to the extent claimed. Additionally, awards were made for reimbursement of unpaid wages, holiday pay, and an alternative day, as well as a penalty for a breach of good faith.
After the investigation meeting, the applicant withdrew claims for underpayment of wages during the COVID-19 lockdown period and a claim for failure to provide a workplace safe from harassment. A monetary claim for reimbursement for unpaid meal breaks throughout the entire period of employment was also withdrawn, and the respondent agreed to reimburse money deducted.
Costs were reserved and an exchange of cost submissions was scheduled. The applicant submitted that costs should follow the event and that the applicant was successful in several claims. The applicant sought costs based on the daily tariff for a day and one quarter, which totalled $5,375. In response, the respondent submitted that the respondent had a substantial element of success in defending the claims of the applicant because the applicant’s primary claim and the focus for the defence was the constructive dismissal claim.
The Authority had to determine the legal framework for an assessment of costs where the parties had mixed success, who was the successful party, and whether costs should lie where they fall or there should be an adjustment to the daily tariff rate. The Authority found that the applicant was the successful party, but costs should not lie where they fall because of the mixed success. In assessing a starting point, the Authority considered the daily tariff based on a day and a quarter because written submissions were provided. The investigation meeting occupied one full day, and the daily tariff was set for all preparation for an investigation meeting. The Authority did not increase the daily tariff based on written submissions provided.
The starting point for an assessment of costs was $4,500. The Authority took into account that the applicant was not successful in all claims, including the main claim of unjustified constructive dismissal. However, the alternative claim of unjustified disadvantage based on unreasonable deductions from wages without consent was made out, and some claims were withdrawn by the applicant. The respondent agreed during the investigation meeting to pay money deducted. A fair and reasonable award of costs was arrived at by deducting $750 from the daily tariff of $4,500 to account for the mixed success.
In conclusion, the Authority ordered Breads of Europe (2015) Limited to pay Aaron Mitchell costs in the sum of $3,750 and reimburse his filing fee in the sum of $71.56. The determination demonstrates the importance of following the legal framework for an assessment of costs and considering the mixed success of the parties in such cases.
Comments