Almeras & Velez (No 3)

Case [2025] FedCFamC2F 922


FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

(DIVISION 2)

Almeras & Velez (No 3) [2025] FedCFamC2F 922  

File number(s): WOC 192 of 2024
Judgment of: JUDGE TURNBULL
Date of judgment: 4 July 2025
Catchwords: FAMILY LAW — COSTS — Whether costs should be ordered, and if so, on an indemnity basis –  Where the Respondent filed but later abandoned contravention applications after a number of hearing days
Legislation: Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) – section 117
Cases cited:

Almeras & Velez (No 2) [2024] FedCFamC2F 1117

D & D (Costs) (No. 2) (2010) FLC 93-435

Ebner & Pappas and Anor [2015] FamCAFC 39

Fitzgerald (as Child Representative for A (Legal Aid Commission of Tasmania)) v Fish [2005] FamCA 158

Motor Trades Association of Australia Superannuation Fund Pty Ltd v Rickus [2007] FCA 1878 at 25 and Beach Petroleum NL v Johnson (1995) 57 FCR 119

Penfold v Penfold (1980) 144 CLR 311

Division: Division 2 Family Law
Number of paragraphs: 36
Date of hearing: 5 May 2025
Place: Hobart
Solicitor for the Applicant: Ms An
Solicitor for the Applicant: Charis Law Pty Ltd
Respondent: No Appearance

ORDERS

WOC 192 of 2024

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 2)

BETWEEN:

MS VELEZ

Applicant

AND:

MR ALMERAS

Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:

JUDGE TURNBULL

DATE OF ORDER:

4 JULY 2025

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.Within sixty (60) days of the date of this Order, Mr Almeras pay Ms Velez’s costs of and incidental to his Applications — Contravention filed by 15 March 2024 and 3 May 2024, with such costs to paid in the total sum of $21,207.40 (including GST).

2.Mr Almeras is to make payment of costs set out in Order 1 directly to the Applicant’s solicitors, ‘Charis Law Pty Ltd’, … into the Charis Law Practice Trust Account, BSB …, Account Number …51.

3.Save for the Application for Final Orders filed by Ms Velez filed 6 June 2024, all extant applications, relating to any Contravention, including the Application – Contravention filed 3 May 2024, are otherwise dismissed.

THE COURT NOTES THAT:

A.These Orders have been amended pursuant to rule 10.13 of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth).

Note:   The form of the order is subject to the entry in the Court’s records.

Note: This copy of the Court’s Reasons for judgment may be subject to review to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors (r 10.14(b) Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 10.13 Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth).

Part XIVB of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) makes it an offence, except in very limited circumstances, to publish an account of proceedings that identify persons, associated persons, or witnesses involved in family law proceedings.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment by this Court under a pseudonym has been approved pursuant to subsection 114Q(2) of the Family…

Continue reading Almeras & Velez (No 3)

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Almeras & Velez (No 3) [2025] FedCFamC2F 922
Case
[2025] FedCFamC2F 922
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter before the court involved a dispute between Ms Velez, the applicant, and Mr Almeras, the respondent. The primary issue was whether costs should be ordered against Mr Almeras for his contravention applications, and if so, whether these costs should be on an indemnity basis. The contravention applications were filed but subsequently abandoned by Mr Almeras after several hearing days. The case was heard in the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia.

The court was required to determine whether the costs incurred by Ms Velez due to Mr Almeras's contravention applications should be ordered, and if so, on an indemnity basis. The court needed to consider the nature of the contravention applications, the conduct of the parties, and the relevant provisions of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth). Specifically, the court had to assess whether Mr Almeras's conduct warranted indemnity costs and whether such an order was proportionate and just under the circumstances.

In its decision, the court held that Mr Almeras should be ordered to pay Ms Velez’s costs of and incidental to his contravention applications. The court found that Mr Almeras's conduct warranted indemnity costs due to the unnecessary prolongation of the proceedings. The court emphasised the importance of just and proportionate costs orders in family law matters and concluded that ordering indemnity costs was appropriate in this case. The court further dismissed all extant contravention applications except for the application for final orders filed by Ms Velez.

The court ordered that Mr Almeras pay Ms Velez’s costs within sixty days, in the total sum of $21,207.40, including GST. The payment was to be made directly to Ms Velez’s solicitors. All other extant contravention applications were dismissed, except for the application for final orders. The court's decision reflects a balanced approach to costs in family law matters, taking into account the need for proportionality and fairness.

Orders

Orders of the court

WOC 192 of 2024

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 2)

BETWEEN:

MS VELEZ

Applicant

AND:

MR ALMERAS

Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:

JUDGE TURNBULL

DATE OF ORDER:

4 JULY 2025

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. Within sixty (60) days of the date of this Order, Mr Almeras pay Ms Velez’s costs of and incidental to his Applications — Contravention filed by 15 March 2024 and 3 May 2024, with such costs to paid in the total sum of $21,207.40 (including GST).

2. Mr Almeras is to make payment of costs set out in Order 1 directly to the Applicant’s solicitors, ‘Charis Law Pty Ltd’, … into the Charis Law Practice Trust Account, BSB …, Account Number …51.

3. Save for the Application for Final Orders filed by Ms Velez filed 6 June 2024, all extant applications, relating to any Contravention, including the Application – Contravention filed 3 May 2024, are otherwise dismissed.

THE COURT NOTES THAT:

A. These Orders have been amended pursuant to rule 10.13 of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth).

Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry in the Court’s records.

Note: This copy of the Court’s Reasons for judgment may be subject to review to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors (r 10.14(b) Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 10.13 Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth).

Part XIVB of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) makes it an offence, except in very limited circumstances, to publish an account of proceedings that identify persons, associated persons, or witnesses involved in family law proceedings.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.