GJ v AS (No 4)

The parties in this matter were GJ (appellant) and AS (respondent). The dispute concerned an appeal regarding an award of costs. The case was heard by Refshauge, Rangiah JJ and Walmsley AJ in the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the appellant should be ordered to pay the respondent's costs, particularly in light of the appellant's unsuccessful attempt to rely on new affidavit evidence during the proceedings. The Court was required to consider the purpose of a costs order, the ordinary rule regarding costs, and the discretionary entitlement to costs as a matter of practice and procedure. Furthermore, the Court had to determine its jurisdiction to order costs under the relevant legislation.

The Court reasoned that the ordinary rule is that costs follow the event, and that the discretionary entitlement to costs is a matter of practice and procedure. The Court noted that leave had not been granted to the appellant to rely on new affidavit evidence. Applying these principles, and considering its jurisdiction under the Domestic Violence and Protection Orders Act, the Court determined that the appellant should bear the respondent's costs.

The Court ordered that the appellant pay the respondent’s costs.