Big Kahuna Holdings argued Mr Booth's costs were unreasonable and that they were unnecessarily inflated by his decision to instruct Auckland lawyers.
The company argued there were a number of suitably qualified employment practitioners in Whangarei who could have been instructed and that his decision to instruct out of town lawyers resulted in higher costs by a margin of about $175 an hour.
But Judge Inglis said the fact that one lawyer may charge more per hour than another did not automatically mean the overall costs incurred would be excessive.
"And in the present case, I accept that the plaintiff [Mr Booth] was entitled to treat the claim seriously, having regard to the nature of the interests at stake," she ruled.
Steve Bowling, owner of Big Kahuna Holdings, had said the court ruling that ordered his company to pay compensation and lost wages could reflect on the welfare of young women at work.
In May 2012, Mr Booth began a relationship with Mr Bowling's daughter, who was 17 years his junior and who also worked at the company.
She moved in with him at Ngunguru.
The woman found other employment but introduced Mr Booth to one of her friends, who had just finished tertiary study and was looking for work. The friend was hired by Big Kahuna and reported directly to Mr Booth.
About a year later, when Mr Booth's partner moved out and ended the relationship, a series of text messages between him and the other woman (her friend) that the company deemed inappropriate led to his dismissal.
Once the texts became known in the workplace, Mr Bowling went to Mr Booth's house and handed him a suspension letter. The letter set out allegations of serious misconduct.
The dismissal process was flawed, said Judge Inglis.
He said Mr Bowling was ill-equipped to conduct the investigative and disciplinary process, given the strong views he held about the relationship.
