FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
| BINETT & BINETT | [2019] FamCA 723 |
| FAMILY LAW – COSTS – Where wife seeks order as to indemnity costs – Where consideration of applicable principles – Where not appropriate to order indemnity costs – Where not appropriate to make any order for costs. |
| Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) s 117 Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth) r 19.08, 19.18 |
| Anison & Anison [2019] FamCAFC 108 Beach Petroleum NL v Johnson (No 2) (1995) 135 ALR 160 Binett & Binett [2018] FamCA 441 Colgate-Palmolive Company and Colgate-Palmolive Pty Limited v Cussons Pty Limited [1993] FCA 536 Collins & Collins (1985) FLC 91-603 D & D (Costs) (No. 2) [2010] FamCAFC 64 Fennessy & Gregorian [2009] FamCAFC 44 Greedy & Greedy (1982) FLC 91-250 Harris & Dewell & Harris (Costs) [2018] FamCAFC 180 Hawkins & Roe [2012] FamCAFC 77 Idoport Pty Ltd v National Australia Bank Ltd [2007] NSWSC 23 Joyce & Fante [2013] FamCAFC 141 Limousin & Limousin [2007] FamCAFC 1178 Luadaka & Luadaka (1998) FLC 92-830 Parke & the Estate of the Late A Parke (2016) FLC 93-748 Penfold v Penfold (1980) 144 CLR 311 Yunghanns & Ors & Yunghanns & Ors & Yunghanns [2000] FamCA 681 |
| APPLICANT: | Ms Binett |
| RESPONDENT: | Mr Binett |
| FILE NUMBER: | PAC | 1422 | of | 2017 |
| DATE DELIVERED: | 4 October 2019 |
| PLACE DELIVERED: | Parramatta |
| PLACE HEARD: | Parramatta |
| JUDGMENT OF: | Foster J |
| HEARING DATE: | By way of written submissions last received on 2 August 2019 |
REPRESENTATION
| COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: | Mr Batey |
| SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT: | Jacqueline Kyle Family Law |
| COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT: | Ms Lawson |
| SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT: | LCI Legal |
Orders
The wife’s application for costs is dismissed.
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 Binett & Binett 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 2004 (Cth).
| FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT PARRAMATTA |
FILE NUMBER: PAC 1422 of 2017
| Ms Binett |
Applicant
And
| Mr Binett |
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
The application for determination is an application for costs contained in the wife’s Application in a Case filed 26 June 2019 and husband’s Response filed 27 June 2019 in ongoing property proceedings between the parties.
The wife’s interim application concerned various interim property orders which included orders:
a)That the husband to deposit proceeds of registered mortgage ... into a trust account in the joint names of the parties
b)That S Business be appointed a valuer for a property at Z Street, Suburb V; and
c)That the parties sign a joint letter of instruction to facilitate such and other orders as to disclosure…
Continue reading Binett and Binett
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Binett and Binett [2019] FamCA 723
- Case
- [2019] FamCA 723
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issue before the court was whether the wife should be awarded costs in relation to proceedings between the parties.
Foster J dismissed the wife's application for costs. The reasons for this decision are not detailed in the provided extract. The court made no other orders in relation to costs.
Orders
Orders of the court
1.
The wife’s application for costs is dismissed.
Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry of the order in the Court’s records.
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.