Fatseas v Fatseas bht Basha (No 3)

The case before the court involved the parties Fatseas and Basha. The dispute centred around the costs associated with two competing notices of motion concerning Heads of Agreement. The matter was heard in the Family Court of Australia.

The central legal issues that the court had to address were whether the costs incurred in the preparation and filing of the competing notices of motion were recoverable and, if so, to what extent. The court had to determine whether the costs were ordinary or special costs, and whether they were incurred in the course of the proceedings or were extraneous to them. Additionally, the court needed to assess whether the costs were reasonable and necessary in the context of the proceedings.

In its decision, the court found that the costs of the competing notices of motion were not recoverable as they were not directly related to the proceedings but were rather a result of the parties' strategic decisions in the litigation. The court held that the costs were special costs and not ordinary costs of the court, and as such, they were not recoverable. The court emphasised that special costs are those that are not necessarily incurred in the course of the proceedings, but are rather incidental to the litigation. The court also noted that the costs were not reasonable and necessary as they were a result of the parties' own actions rather than the court's requirements. The court further held that the costs should not be awarded as they were not in the interest of justice to do so.

The court ordered that the costs of the competing notices of motion were not recoverable by either party. The court emphasised that the parties should bear their own costs and not seek to recover them from each other. The court also noted that the costs should not be awarded as they were not in the interest of justice to do so.