BOSWORTH & FIRKINS

In *Bosworth & Firkins* [2013] FamCA 7, the Family Court of Australia considered an application for costs following substantive property settlement proceedings. The original proceedings were brought under the *Domestic Relationships Act 1994* (ACT) and were heard by the Family Court exercising the cross-vested jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory. Ms Firkins, the respondent in the substantive proceedings, sought an order that Mr Bosworth, the applicant, pay her costs. Mr Bosworth sought an order that each party bear their own costs.

The primary legal issue before the Court was which legislative framework governed the costs application: the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) or the laws of the Australian Capital Territory. A further issue was whether a settlement offer made by Ms Firkins constituted special circumstances justifying a departure from the ordinary rule that costs follow the event. The Court also considered the application of the principle that costs follow the event in complex matters where issues were resolved in favour of different parties.

The Court determined that because it was exercising the cross-vested jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of the ACT, the law of the ACT, specifically Rule 1721 of the *Court Procedures Rules 2006* (ACT), applied to the costs application, not Section 117 of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). Under ACT law, costs are in the discretion of the court, and ordinarily follow the event unless special circumstances exist. The Court noted that while Ms Firkins had made a settlement offer that was close to the final outcome, the substantive proceedings involved significant complexities and disparate positions on issues such as the end date of the relationship, add-backs, and contributions, which necessitated judicial determination. The Court found that these complexities meant that the matter required judicial resolution and that the conduct of the parties did not warrant a costs order.

Consequently, the Court made no order as to costs, meaning each party was to bear their own costs of the proceedings.