Farmer and Panshin

In the matter of *Farmer and Panshin*, heard by Judge Altobelli, the dispute concerned the costs of proceedings. The applicant sought to have certain costs orders made against them vacated or varied, while the respondent sought to uphold those orders.

The primary legal issue before the court was the appropriate allocation of costs between the parties, particularly in light of earlier interlocutory decisions and the final resolution of the substantive matter. The court was required to determine whether the general rule that costs follow the event should apply, or if there were exceptional circumstances justifying a departure from this rule, and how to address costs reserved on multiple occasions.

Judge Altobelli considered the history of the proceedings and the conduct of the parties. The court ultimately ordered that, with specific exceptions, the applicant was to pay the respondent's costs from 8 July 2011. However, the respondent was ordered to pay the applicant's costs that had been specifically reserved on several earlier dates. Furthermore, an order made by Federal Magistrate Kemp on 14 March 2013 was vacated to allow the respondent access to her share of sale proceeds from a property, as per earlier orders.