Flinn v Flinn

In Flinn v Flinn, the respondent, who is the appellant in the matter before this court, applied for costs against a non-party, being the appellant’s daughter, who controlled and financed the appeal. The respondent sought the costs of the appeal as well as the costs of the fact-finding procedure conducted by a Commissioner, as the appellant was mentally incompetent and impecunious.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether it had the jurisdiction to make an order for costs against a non-party, and if so, the extent of that jurisdiction. The court considered whether the appellant’s daughter, who was not a party to the proceedings, could be held liable for the costs incurred by the respondent. The court also had to determine the appropriate quantum of costs in light of the appellant’s mental incompetence and financial incapacity.

The court found that it did have the jurisdiction to make an order for costs against a non-party, relying on section 24 of the Supreme Court Act 1986. The court held that the appellant’s daughter, who was controlling and financing the appeal, was in a position to bear the costs. The court considered the principles of fairness and justice in determining the appropriate quantum of costs, taking into account the appellant’s mental incompetence and impecunious nature. The court ultimately ordered that the appellant’s daughter pay the costs of the appeal and the fact-finding procedure.