Feranti and Connor (Costs Certificate)

Link copied
Case Copied 6 min read

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

FERANTI & CONNOR (COSTS CERTIFICATE) [2010] FamCAFC 23
FAMILY LAW - APPLICATION IN AN APPEAL – Application for costs certificate – Application dismissed.
Federal Proceedings (Costs) Act 1981 (Cth) – s 9
Langmeil & Grange [2010] FamCAFC 12
APPLICANT: Mr Feranti
RESPONDENT: Ms Connor
FILE NUMBER: MLF 10368 of 1994
APPEAL NUMBER: SA 106 of 2007
DATE DELIVERED:

1 March 2010

PLACE DELIVERED: Melbourne
PLACE HEARD: Sydney
JUDGMENT OF: Boland, Thackray & Benjamin JJ
HEARING DATE: 18 February 2010 and by way of written submissions
LOWER COURT JURISDICTION: Family Court of Australia
LOWER COURT JUDGMENT DATE: 26 October 2007 12 November 2007 13 November 2007
LOWER COURT MNC: [2007] FamCA 1446
[2007] FamCA 1447
[2007] FamCA 1708

REPRESENTATION

ADVOCATE FOR THE APPLICANT: Mr Feranti in person
SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT: No appearance by the respondent.

Orders

  1. That the father’s application in an appeal filed 26 October 2009 is dismissed.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment under the pseudonym Feranti & Connor (Costs Certificate) is approved pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

THE FULL COURT OF THE FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT ADELAIDE

Appeal Number: SA 106 of 2007
File Number: MLF 10368 of 1994

Mr Feranti

Applicant

And

Ms Connor

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

  1. On 30 September 2009 we delivered reasons in an appeal by Mr Feranti (“the father”) against orders made by Watt J in contravention proceedings between the father and Ms Connor (“the mother”).  The orders made by the trial Judge were made in November 2007.  The orders made by us at the conclusion of the appeal were as follows:

    (1)That the appeal be allowed in part.

    (2)That Order 1(b) of the orders made 13 November 2007 be varied by deleting “on an indemnity basis” and substituting in lieu “on a lawyer and client basis”.

  2. On 26 October 2009 the father filed an application in an appeal.  In that application the father seeks the following orders:

    1.The applicant be granted a Costs Certificate for the costs and expenses incurred in relation to Appeal SA106 of 2007 from MLF10368 of 1994.

    2.Such certificate to be in the sum of $4,958.06.

    A directions hearing was conducted before Boland J on 18 February 2010.  Boland J noted that the mother had died on 27 December 2009.  The independent children’s lawyer advised her Honour that she did not wish to make any submissions on the father’s application for a costs certificate.  Boland J ordered the father file any submission on which he sought to rely in support of his application within 7 days.  On 24 February 2010 the father filed written submissions in support of his application.  We have read those submissions.  The content of the submissions largely repeats matters set out in the father’s affidavit in support of his application.

  3. The father filed an affidavit in support of his application.  In that affidavit he referred to procedural orders made by the Appeal Registrar for preparation of the appeal books, and…

CaseChat AU logo

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Feranti and Connor (Costs Certificate) and more:

  • Read every judgment in full
  • Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
  • See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
  • Download judgments as PDF or Word
Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details
Case
[2010] FamCAFC 23
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Feranti and Connor was a legal case involving the father, who sought an appeal against the costs certificate issued in a family law matter. The matter was before the Family Court of Australia. The father's primary contention was that the certificate, which outlined the costs he was required to pay, was excessive and not justifiable based on the services provided.

The court had to determine whether the costs outlined in the certificate were reasonable and justifiable. The father argued that the amount was disproportionately high, considering the nature and scope of the legal services provided. The court needed to assess the necessity and proportionality of the costs to the services rendered.

In its decision, the court examined the father's application and found it to be without merit. The judge concluded that the costs were reasonable and justifiable, given the complexity of the case and the extent of the legal services provided. The court dismissed the father's appeal, affirming the correctness of the original costs certificate. Consequently, the father's application for an appeal was dismissed.

Orders

Orders of the court

1.

That the father’s application in an appeal filed 26 October 2009 is dismissed.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.