COWAN & COWAN (No.2)

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

COWAN & COWAN (No.2) [2019] FCCA 2267

Catchwords:
FAMILY LAW – COSTS – Husband seeks costs after final property hearing – wife counter claims – whether or not any costs should be ordered.

Legislation:

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), ss.75(2)(o), 117(1), 117(2A)

Cases cited:

Calderbank v Calderbank [1975] 3 ALL ER 333
Cowan & Cowan [2019] FCCA 720
Harris and Harris (1991) FLC 92-354
In the Marriage of Pennisi (1997) 22 Fam LR

Applicant: MR COWAN

Respondent: MS COWAN

File Number: MLC 5967 of 2016

Judgment of: Judge Harland

Hearing date: 13 May 2019

Date of Last Submission: 7 June 2019

Delivered at: Melbourne

Delivered on: 19 August 2019

REPRESENTATION

Counsel for the Applicant: Mr Trim

Solicitors for the Applicant: Whyte Just & Moore

Counsel for the Respondent: Ms Fisken

Solicitors for the Respondent: Harwood Andrews Lawyers

ORDERS

1. The application in a case filed on 16 April 2019 and the response to the application in a case filed on 17 April 2019 be dismissed.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment under the pseudonym Cowan & Cowan (No.2) is approved pursuant to s.121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT
OF AUSTRALIA
AT MELBOURNE

MLC 5967 of 2016

MR COWAN

Applicant

And

MS COWAN

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. The Court handed down final property orders in this matter on 22 March 2019. Both parties are seeking costs against the other.

2. The husband commenced proceedings on 2 November 2016. The procedural delays in this matter have been significant. Such delays caused the trial to be adjourned for nearly twelve months after it was commenced in February 2018. The proceedings were finalised after the trial recommenced in January 2019.

3. The matter proceeded to trial on 1 February 2018 for two days and was adjourned part heard to 23 April 2018. The wife made an application in a case on 20 April 2018 necessitating the adjournment of the trial. There were further listings for 27 April 2018 and 12 October 2018. The trial resumed on 21 and 22 January 2019.

4. On 22 March 2019 I delivered my reasons in this matter. The circumstances of the application in a case made by the wife on 20 April 2018 are set out in my primary judgment Cowan & Cowan [2019] FCCA 720. Those reasons should be read with these reasons for background.

5. The husband filed an application in a case on 16 April 2019 with respect to costs. The application sought an order that the husband pay to the wife $120,000 rather than the sum of $151,037 that was ordered on 22 March 2019 which would allow for a discount for some of the husband’s costs.

6. The wife filed a response on 17 April 2019 in which she made a cross application for costs. Her application sought an order for the husband’s application in a case to be dismissed and that the husband pay to the wife “such sum as is deemed appropriate by this…