Bruin & Bruin (No 3) - [2024] FedCFamC2F 380

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
(DIVISION 2)
Bruin & Bruin (No 3) [2024] FedCFamC2F 380

File number(s): MLC 1939 of 2022

Judgment of: JUDGE HARLAND

Date of judgment: 26 March 2024

Catchwords: FAMILY LAW – costs – father seeks costs for the preparation of responding to the application in a proceeding filed by the mother – father privately funded – mother self-represented – mother seeks parties pay their own costs

Legislation:
Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) ss 67Z, 117(1), 117(2A), 117(4)

Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) (Family Law) Rules 2021 Schedule 1

Cases cited:
Bruin & Bruin [2024] FedCFamC2F 102

Bruin & Bruin (No 2) [2024] FedCFamC2F 176

Division: Division 2 Family Law

Number of paragraphs: 25

Date of last submission/s: 12 March 2024

Date of hearing: 7 February 2024

Place: Melbourne

Solicitor for the Applicant Coote Family Law

The Respondent Self-Represented.

Solicitor for the Independent Children’s Lawyer Trapski Family Law
ORDERS

MLC 1939 of 2022

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 2)

BETWEEN:
MR BRUIN

Applicant

AND:
MS BRUIN

Respondent

INDEPENDENT CHILDREN'S LAWYER

ORDER MADE BY:

JUDGE HARLAND

DATE OF ORDER:

26 MARCH 2024

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.The respondent pay the applicant’s costs in the sum of $2,712.97 within 30 days.

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).
Section 121 of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) makes it an offence, except in very limited circumstances, to publish 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 s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
JUDGE HARLAND

On 14 February 2024, I delivered my reasons with respect to the mother’s application in a proceeding filed 31 January 2024. On the same day I also delivered my reasons in respect of the primary application for final parenting orders. My reasons for decision in relation to the mother’s application in a proceeding are set out in Bruin & Bruin [2024] FedCFamC2F 102 and my reasons for decision in the primary application are set out in Bruin & Bruin (No 2) [2024] FedCFamC2F 176. Both of these reasons should be read with these for background.
The father submits that this case justifies a departure from the usual position that the parties pay their own costs, and that the mother pay the father’s costs of $5,424 pursuant to schedule 1 of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) (Family Law) Rules 2021.
The mother submits…

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 Bruin & Bruin (No 3)

Details

AGLC: Bruin & Bruin (No 3) [2024] FedCFamC2F 380
Case: [2024] FedCFamC2F 380
Decision Date: 26 March 2024

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of Bruin & Bruin, the father, Mr. Bruin, sought an order for costs related to his preparation and response to an application filed by the mother, Ms. Bruin. The mother appeared self-represented, while the father was privately funded. The matter came before Judge Harland in Division 2 of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia. The mother opposed the application for costs, arguing that both parties should bear their own costs. The primary legal issue before the court was whether the father was entitled to recover the costs he incurred in responding to the mother's application.

Judge Harland considered the nature of the dispute and the parties' respective positions. The judge noted that the father had been required to engage professional assistance to respond adequately to the application, which was a consequence of the mother's self-representation. The court acknowledged that while the mother had chosen to represent herself, this did not absolve her from contributing to the costs incurred by the father. The judge emphasised the importance of ensuring that the financial burden of legal proceedings does not disproportionately affect one party due to the other's choice to self-represent. In light of these considerations, the court determined that the mother should contribute to the father's costs for the preparation and response to the application.

The court ordered that the mother pay the father's costs in the sum of $2,712.97 within 30 days. This decision reflects the court's intention to balance the financial implications of self-representation with the need for equitable distribution of costs between parties in family law proceedings. The form of the order is subject to review for any minor typographical or grammatical errors, or to record any variation to the order as per the relevant federal rules.

Orders

Orders of the court

MLC 1939 of 2022

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 2)

BETWEEN:

MR BRUIN

Applicant

AND:

MS BRUIN

Respondent

INDEPENDENT CHILDREN'S LAWYER

ORDER MADE BY:

JUDGE HARLAND

DATE OF ORDER:

26 MARCH 2024

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. The respondent pay the applicant’s costs in the sum of $2,712.97 within 30 days.

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).

Section 121 of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) makes it an offence, except in very limited circumstances, to publish 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.

File number(s):	MLC 1939 of 2022
Judgment of:	JUDGE HARLAND
Date of judgment:	26 March 2024
Catchwords:	FAMILY LAW – costs – father seeks costs for the preparation of responding to the application in a proceeding filed by the mother – father privately funded – mother self-represented – mother seeks parties pay their own costs
Legislation:	Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) ss 67Z, 117(1), 117(2A), 117(4) Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) (Family Law) Rules 2021 Schedule 1
Cases cited:	Bruin & Bruin [2024] FedCFamC2F 102 Bruin & Bruin (No 2) [2024] FedCFamC2F 176
Division:	Division 2 Family Law
Number of paragraphs:	25
Date of last submission/s:	12 March 2024
Date of hearing:	7 February 2024
Place:	Melbourne
Solicitor for the Applicant	Coote Family Law
The Respondent	Self-Represented.
Solicitor for the Independent Children’s Lawyer	Trapski Family Law

MLC 1939 of 2022
FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 2)
BETWEEN:	MR BRUIN Applicant
AND:	MS BRUIN Respondent
INDEPENDENT CHILDREN'S LAWYER

ORDER MADE BY:	JUDGE HARLAND
DATE OF ORDER:	26 MARCH 2024