DARROW & MALDEN

In proceedings NCC1896 of 2015 before Rees J of the Family Court of Australia, the applicant and respondent sought orders concerning costs following the dismissal of the substantive proceedings for want of jurisdiction. The court was required to determine whether it possessed an implied power to order solicitors to pay costs in circumstances where the substantive proceedings were not considered to be "proceedings under the Act" for the purposes of section 117 of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth).

The court reasoned that for an implied power to order solicitors to pay costs to arise, the conduct in question must extend beyond mere negligence and constitute a serious dereliction of duty. Rees J found the actions of both the applicant's and the respondent's solicitors to be inexcusable, particularly given that the proceedings should not have been commenced in the Family Court of Australia. This finding was made in the context of existing orders for the applicant to pay the costs of the second, third, and fourth respondents on an indemnity basis and to indemnify the first respondent up to the point jurisdiction was raised.

Consequently, Rees J ordered that the applicant's solicitors, Legal Minds, indemnify the applicant for any costs incurred in the proceedings. Furthermore, the respondent's solicitors, Watts McCray, were restrained from charging the first respondent for any work undertaken in the proceedings after 30 September 2016.