Cambridge and Cambridge (Costs)

In *Cambridge and Cambridge (Costs)*, Coleman J of the Family Court of Australia considered an application for costs made by the wife against the husband following proceedings for the settlement of property. The wife sought an order that the husband pay her costs of the trial.

The central legal issue before the court was whether, in all the circumstances, an order for costs should be made against the husband. This involved assessing whether the asserted disparity in the parties' financial circumstances justified such an order, and considering the husband's conduct during the proceedings, specifically his failure to give evidence or his provision of misleading evidence, as well as the wife's offer of compromise.

Coleman J reasoned that while a disparity in financial circumstances alone might not always justify a costs order, the husband's conduct in failing to give evidence or giving misleading evidence, coupled with the wife's offer of compromise, weighed in favour of making an order for costs against him. The court concluded that in the totality of the circumstances, it was appropriate for the husband to bear the wife's costs of the trial.

Consequently, the court ordered that the husband pay the wife’s costs of and incidental to the trial of the proceedings held on 6, 7, 8 and 9 September 2010, to be agreed or assessed on a party and party basis.