Ahsan and Ahsan & Anor

In *Ahsan and Ahsan & Anor*, Foster J of the Family Court of Australia considered applications concerning property and costs. The proceedings involved a dispute between the parties regarding interim property orders and a review of a Registrar's decision on costs. The asset pool was not precisely defined, and there was a lack of evidence regarding valuations, leading to a determination that making interim property orders was not appropriate at that stage.

The court was required to determine whether it was just and equitable to make interim property orders given the imprecision of the asset pool and the absence of valuations. Additionally, the court had to review a Registrar's decision regarding costs, specifically concerning the wife's contravention application. This review was to be conducted as a hearing *de novo*.

Foster J reasoned that, in the absence of clear evidence as to the asset pool and valuations, it was not appropriate to make interim property orders. Regarding costs, the court noted that the asset pool was not insignificant and that both parties could be inferred to be in receipt of income. Crucially, the wife had withdrawn her contravention application and had been wholly unsuccessful in her applications. Consequently, the court found it appropriate that the wife pay the husband's costs of and incidental to her contravention application, either as agreed or assessed, to be paid from her share of the proceeds of sale of a specified property. The second respondent's application for costs was dismissed, and otherwise, the wife's application in a case was dismissed.