FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
(DIVISION 2)
Channing & Channing (No 5) [2024] FedCFamC2F 1574
File number(s): PAC 5460 of 2021 Judgment of: JUDGE OBRADOVIC Date of judgment: 12 November 2024 Catchwords: FAMILY LAW – COSTS – Interlocutory application wholly unsuccessful Legislation: Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) s 117
Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth) schedule 1
Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth) r 1.33
Cases cited: Colgate Palmolive Co and Anor v Cussons Pty Ltd [1993] FCA 801
Collins & Collins [1985] FamCA 15
Fitzgerald v Fish and Anor [2005] FamCA 158
Greedy and Greedy [1982] FamCA 41
I & I (No.2) [1995] FamCA 80
Jensen & Jensen [1982] FamCA 57
Kohan & Kohan [1992] FamCA 116
Latoudis v Casey [1990] HCA 59
Medlon & Medlon (No. 6) (Indemnity Costs) [2015] FamCAFC 157
Munday v Bowman (1997) FLC 92-784
Penfold & Penfold [1980] HCA 4
Renald & Renald (Costs) [2018] FamCAFC 4
Stasiuk & Guild [2021] FamCAFC 62
Division: Division 2 Family Law Number of paragraphs: 38 Date of last submission/s: 4 November 2024 Date of hearing: On the papers Place: Parramatta Solicitor for the Applicant: Hikma Legal Solicitor for the Respondent: AJL Legal ORDERS
PAC 5460 of 2021 FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 2)
BETWEEN: MS CHANNING
Applicant
AND: MR CHANNING
Respondent
ORDER MADE BY:
JUDGE OBRADOVIC
DATE OF ORDER:
12 NOVEMBER 2024
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.Within 28 days, the respondent pay the applicant’s costs of the Application in a Proceeding filed 20 February 2024, assessed in the amount of $6,710.48.
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).
Part XIVB of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) makes it an offence, except in very limited circumstances, to publish an account of 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 subsection 114Q(2) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
JUDGE OBRADOVIC:
These are the Reasons for Judgment in respect of the applicant’s oral application for costs made on 21 March 2024.
It is an application for costs of the Application in a Proceeding, filed on 20 February 2024 (‘AiP’). It is made on an indemnity basis.
For the sake of clarity, the AiP was lodged for filing after hours on 19 February 2024 and has interchangeably been referred to as being filed on both 19 and 20 February 2024, in various places on the Court…
Continue reading Channing & Channing (No 5)
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Channing & Channing (No 5) [2024] FedCFamC2F 1574
- Case
- [2024] FedCFamC2F 1574
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues before the court encompassed the assessment and allocation of costs following the unsuccessful application. The court had to determine whether the unsuccessful application warranted any costs and, if so, the amount and the party responsible for those costs.
Judge Obradovic's reasoning involved a thorough examination of the circumstances surrounding the application and the outcome. The court concluded that the application was entirely unsuccessful, and thus, costs were warranted. The respondent, Mr Channing, was ordered to pay the applicant's costs of the application, assessed at $6,710.48. This decision was based on the principle that costs should follow the event, and in this case, the unsuccessful nature of the application justified an order for costs against the applicant.
The court's final order mandated that within 28 days, Mr Channing was to pay Ms Channing's costs of the application in the specified amount. This ruling adhered to the principles of cost allocation in family law proceedings, ensuring that unsuccessful applications do not go without financial consequence for the applicant.
Orders
Orders of the court
PAC 5460 of 2021
FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 2)
BETWEEN:
MS CHANNING
Applicant
AND:
MR CHANNING
Respondent
ORDER MADE BY:
JUDGE OBRADOVIC
DATE OF ORDER:
12 NOVEMBER 2024
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. Within 28 days, the respondent pay the applicant’s costs of the Application in a Proceeding filed 20 February 2024, assessed in the amount of $6,710.48.
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).
Part XIVB of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) makes it an offence, except in very limited circumstances, to publish an account of 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.