Gin & Hing (No 4)

The appeal in Gin & Hing (No 4) arose from orders concerning the costs of parenting proceedings between Mr Gin and Ms Hing. The parties, who were married in 2009 and separated in 2010, had one child. The case involved the costs of a lengthy trial, which ran from May 2019 to November 2023, and the costs of Mr Gin's failed application for a stay and his application to reopen the case post-hearing. The court was required to determine whether the primary judge's costs orders were manifestly unjust and whether there was bias or errors in the reasons given for those orders.

The court found that Mr Gin failed to establish that the primary judge acted upon a wrong principle, took account of extraneous or irrelevant matters, or did not properly exercise the relevant judicial discretion. The court noted that it was not enough for Mr Gin to show that a different decision might have been reached on the same facts. Instead, the court had to be "well satisfied that the primary judge was plainly wrong." Mr Gin's claims of bias and errors in the reasons were also rejected as there was no evidence to support these allegations. However, the court allowed the appeal in part as the primary judge had not properly considered certain statutory provisions, which led to the Full Court setting aside the final judgment.

The court allowed the appeal in part, setting aside the costs orders for the trial proceedings but leaving the costs orders for the failed stay application and the application to reopen undisturbed. The costs application was remitted for rehearing by a different judge in conjunction with the rehearing of the parenting proceedings. The appeal was dismissed otherwise, and the respondent was granted costs certificates for the appeal and the rehearing.