FAMILY LAW – COSTS – Where the wife seeks costs on an indemnity basis against the husband’s solicitors in the first instance – Where the wife submits the husband’s application had no reasonable prospects of success and that the husband’s conduct elongated the hearing – Where the wife made settlement offers to the husband – Where the husbands application was wholly unsuccessful – Court finds costs orders against the husband’s solicitors are not justified – Court finds an order for indemnity costs not justified – Order made for payment lump sum costs payment.
The Applicant de facto husband pay the costs of the Respondent de facto wife in the sum of $10,598.44 within 28 days.
Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry of the order in the Court’s records.
IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment by this Court under the pseudonym Berger &Tallis has been approved by the Chief Justice pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).
Note: This copy of the Court’s Reasons for Judgment may be subject to review to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors (r 17.02A(b) of the Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 17.02 Family Law Rules
Grounds of appeal
[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.
[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.
[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.
Consideration
[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.
[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.
Continue reading Berger and Tallis
Sign in free to access the full text
Details
AGLC
Berger and Tallis [2019] FamCA 154
Case
[2019] FamCA 154
Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In *Berger and Tallis*, the applicant de facto husband was ordered to pay the costs of the respondent de facto wife. The specific nature of the dispute leading to this costs order is not detailed in the provided text, but it arose in the context of de facto relationship proceedings before McClelland DCJ.
The central legal issue before the court was the determination of the quantum of costs to be awarded to the respondent. This involved assessing the reasonableness and necessity of the expenses incurred by the respondent in the litigation.
McClelland DCJ ordered the applicant to pay the respondent's costs in the sum of $10,598.44. This amount was to be paid within 28 days of the order being entered into the Court's records.
Orders
Orders of the court
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.
The Applicant de facto husband pay the costs of the Respondent de facto wife in the sum of $10,598.44 within 28 days.
Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry of the order in the Court’s records.