Brown and Ortega

[2013] FCCA 1362

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BROWN & ORTEGA [2013] FCCA 1362

Catchwords:
FAMILY LAW – Costs –application to enforce payment of costs.

Legislation:

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001, r.21.02

Brown & Ortega & Anor [2013] FCCA 845

Applicant: MR BROWN

Respondent: MS ORTEGA

File Number: SYC 1704 of 2011

Judgment of: Judge Scarlett

Hearing date: 13 September 2013

Date of Last Submission: 13 September 2013

Delivered at: Sydney

Delivered on: 13 September 2013

REPRESENTATION

Counsel for the Applicant: Ms Gillies

Solicitors for the Applicant: Paltos Briggs

The Respondents: In person

Counsel for the Independent Children's Lawyer: Mr Ladopoulos

Solicitors for the Independent Children's Lawyer: Legal Aid NSW

ORDERS

1. The Respondent is to comply with Orders (2) and (3) made on 16 July 2013 by paying to the Applicant’s solicitors the amounts of $4,500.00, $2,750.00 and $2,500.00 referred to in those orders within fourteen (14) days.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment under the pseudonym Brown & Ortega is approved pursuant to s.121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT
OF AUSTRALIA
AT SYDNEY

SYC 1704 of 2011

MR BROWN

Applicant

And

MS ORTEGA

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Application

1. The Applicant is seeking to enforce the payment of Orders for costs made on 16 July 2013 (Brown & Ortega & Anor[1]). Those Orders provided that:

   [1] [2013] FCCA 845

   (2)    The Respondent is to pay to the Applicant’s solicitors Paltos Briggs Family Lawyers on behalf of the Applicant the following amounts:

   (a)     The sum of $4,500.00 on account of the Applicant’s costs thrown away in relation to the hearing on 3 July 2013; and

   (b)     The sum of $2,750.00 being one half of the fees paid to Dr C as Court Expert.

   (3)    The Respondent is to pay to the Applicant’s solicitors on behalf of the Applicant the sum of $2,500.00 being the costs of this Application.

2. It is not in issue that the Respondent has not paid any of the amounts referred to.

3. The Applicant’s Counsel asks for an order that the Respondent should pay the amounts outstanding by close of business on Tuesday 17 September. She points out that the parties received payment of the amounts due to them out of the proceeds of sale of their former home early in August.

4. The Respondent told the Court that she had received advice that, as no time for payment was specified in the Orders, she was of the belief that the costs were to be paid after the final hearing. She submitted that payment of those costs should wait until the proceeding had been finalised. She also told the Court that the figures put to the court when the application for costs was heard on 12 July were incorrect.   

Consideration

1. Rule 21.02 provides that the Court may set a time for payment of the costs, which may be before the proceeding is concluded. 

2. In my view, there is no ground to reopen the proceedings for costs. The Respondent did not appeal against the decision and the time for appeal is now past. However, I am not of the view that it is reasonable to order the Respondent to pay the sums, totalling $9,750.00, by close of business on Tuesday 17 September, as that only allows two business days.

3. I propose to allow fourteen days to pay.   

Conclusions

1. The Respondent will be ordered to pay the amounts outstanding within fourteen days.

I certify that the preceding eight (8) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Judge Scarlett

Date:  18 September 2013