EAMES & EAMES (No.2)

In *Eames & Eames (No.2)*, the Federal Circuit Court considered an application by the Respondent for her costs in child support proceedings to be paid on an indemnity basis. The Applicant had been wholly unsuccessful in the application he brought, and it was alleged that this application was, in part, made for a collateral purpose. A further issue before the Court was whether the Respondent's costs should be borne by the Applicant's solicitor rather than the Applicant himself.

The Court was required to determine whether the Respondent should be awarded her costs on an indemnity basis, and crucially, whether the Applicant's solicitor should be personally liable for those costs. This involved assessing the conduct of the Applicant and his legal representative in the proceedings.

Judge Bender ordered that the Respondent's costs be paid by the Applicant's solicitor on an indemnity basis. This decision reflects the Court's finding that the Applicant's application was not only unsuccessful but also pursued for a collateral purpose, justifying the imposition of costs on the solicitor personally and on an indemnity basis. The Court exercised its power under rule 21.07 of the Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 (Cth) to make this order.