Casey by her manager the National Australia Trustees Limited v Pel-Air Aviation Pty Ltd (No 2)

The case involved Casey, represented by her manager National Australia Trustees Limited, who took action against Pel-Air Aviation Pty Ltd. The dispute centred on the legal costs incurred during the proceedings. The Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia was tasked with determining whether there was a proper basis for deviating from the standard costs order and whether the proposed variation of the consent orders was justified.

The court needed to decide if there was a proper basis for departing from the standard costs order, which would allow the party to claim costs on the funds management assessment. Additionally, the court had to assess whether the proposed variation of the consent orders, which would have altered the agreed-upon terms between the parties, was warranted. The case required careful consideration of the principles governing costs and the circumstances surrounding the consent orders.

The court found that there was no proper basis for departing from the standard costs order. The applicant had not established any exceptional circumstances that would justify such a departure. Furthermore, the proposed variation of the consent orders was declined as there was no explanation provided for the proposed changes. The court emphasised the importance of adhering to the agreed terms in consent orders unless there are compelling reasons to vary them. Consequently, the court upheld the standard costs order and declined the variation of the consent orders.

No additional orders were made beyond the refusal to depart from the standard costs order and the refusal to vary the consent orders. The decision reinforced the principle that deviations from standard practice in legal costs and consent orders should only be made in exceptional circumstances and with proper justification.