Cullen and Cullen

In the matter of *Cullen and Cullen*, Judge Neville considered an application by the Father for the recusal of the judge. The dispute concerned costs orders to be made in family law proceedings.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the Father's application for the judge to recuse himself should be granted. A secondary issue, arising from the dismissal of the recusal application, concerned the appropriate orders for costs.

Judge Neville dismissed the Father's recusal application. The court's reasoning, as evidenced by the reference to *Colgate-Palmolive Co v Cussons Pty Ltd*, indicated a general adherence to the ordinary rule of party and party costs, unless specific circumstances warrant a departure. The court noted that such departures require special or unusual features in the case, such as allegations of fraud known to be false, commencement of proceedings for an ulterior motive, or wilful disregard of known facts or established law. The court found that the circumstances of this case did not meet the threshold for recusal or for departing from the ordinary costs rule.

The Father was ordered to pay the Mother's costs in the fixed amount of $3,500 and the Independent Children's Lawyer's costs in the fixed amount of $5,064, both sums to be paid within 28 days.