Galang & Pamplin - [2021] FedCFamC2F 473

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

(DIVISION 2)

Galang & Pamplin [2021] FedCFamC2F 473

File number(s):	MLC 8956 of 2018
Judgment of:	SENIOR JUDICIAL REGISTRAR SUDHOLZ
Date of judgment:	30 November 2021
Catchwords:	FAMILY LAW – COSTS – Mother’s Application for costs – No matter of principle
Legislation:	Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), s. 117. Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) (Family Law) Rules 2021
Cases cited:	Hawkins & Roe [2012] FamCAFC 77 I and I (No 2) (1995) FLC ¶92-625 Kohan & Kohan (1993) FLC 92-340 Wrensted & Eades [2016] FamCAFC 46
Division:	Division 2 Family Law
Number of paragraphs:	25
Date of last submission/s:	30 October 2021
Date of hearing:	10 September 2021
Place:	Melbourne (via Microsoft Teams)

ORDERS

MLC8956/2021
FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 2)
BETWEEN:	MS PAMPLIN Applicant
AND:	MR GALANG Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:	SENIOR JUDICIAL REGISTRAR SUDHOLZ
DATE OF ORDER:	30 NOVEMBER 2021

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

There be no order as to costs with respect to the Application in a Case filed on 1 September 2021 and the Response thereto.

Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry in the Court’s records.

Note: This copy of the Court’s Reasons for judgment may be subject to review to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors (r 10.14(b) Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 10.13 Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth).

Section 121 of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) makes it an offence, except in very limited circumstances, to publish proceedings that identify persons, associated persons, or witnesses involved in family law proceedings.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment by this Court under a pseudonym Pamplin & Galang has been approved pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

SENIOR REGISTRAR SUDHOLZ

INTRODUCTION

This matter comes before me as a consequence of an oral application for costs made by Ms Pamplin (“the Mother”) following the hearing of her Application in a Case filed on 1 September 2021.
At the hearing on 10 September 2021 I reserved the Mother’s costs to Chambers and ordered the filing of submissions, including submissions with respect to the relevant costs scale.
The Mother has not filed submissions with respect to costs sought. The Father filed submissions on 30 October 2021.
The Mother seeks costs on scale. The Respondent Father opposes that application.
The amount set by the Rules for an application of this type is ordinarily at Item 11 of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) (Family Law) Rules 2021. The amount is $997 for the preparation of documents together with Items 13 and 14 (where applicable).
This matter proceeded as an interim defended hearing on 10 September 2021. Accordingly, the appropriate fee is $1178 (Item 13) and $589 (Item 14). This means the…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Galang & Pamplin

Details

AGLC: Galang & Pamplin [2021] FedCFamC2F 473
Case: [2021] FedCFamC2F 473
Decision Date: 30 November 2021

CaseChat Overview and Summary

This case involved a mother, Ms Pamplin, who sought an order for costs against Mr Galang, her former partner and the father of their child. The dispute arose from proceedings that had been filed on 1 September 2021. Ms Pamplin's application for costs was heard by Senior Judicial Registrar Sudholz in the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia, Division 2. The central legal issue before the court was whether Ms Pamplin was entitled to an order for costs in relation to the proceedings and the response thereto. The court was required to consider the principles of costs in family law, specifically whether there was a matter of principle that warranted an order for costs.

The court found that there was no matter of principle that would justify an order for costs. The decision was made in accordance with the principles of family law, which generally discourage the imposition of costs unless there are exceptional circumstances. The court considered the nature of the proceedings and the conduct of both parties, concluding that there were no grounds for awarding costs to Ms Pamplin. The court found that the proceedings were not of such a nature that would warrant a costs order, and there were no significant departures from the usual conduct expected in family law matters.

Consequently, the court ordered that there be no order as to costs with respect to the application and the response. The decision reflects the court's approach to costs in family law, which aims to avoid financial burdens on parties where possible and to promote a fair resolution of disputes. The order ensures that neither party is required to bear the costs of the proceedings, aligning with the court's consideration of the principles involved.

Orders

Orders of the court

MLC8956/2021

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 2)

BETWEEN:

MS PAMPLIN

Applicant

AND:

MR GALANG

Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:

SENIOR JUDICIAL REGISTRAR SUDHOLZ

DATE OF ORDER:

30 NOVEMBER 2021

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

There be no order as to costs with respect to the Application in a Case filed on 1 September 2021 and the Response thereto.

Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry in the Court’s records.

Note: This copy of the Court’s Reasons for judgment may be subject to review to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors (r 10.14(b) Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 10.13 Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth).

Section 121 of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) makes it an offence, except in very limited circumstances, to publish proceedings that identify persons, associated persons, or witnesses involved in family law proceedings.

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.