Grange & Grange - [2020] FamCAFC 63

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

GRANGE & GRANGE AND ORS

[2020] FamCAFC 63

FAMILY LAW – APPEAL – COSTS – Written submissions on the issue of costs – Where only the appellant filed written submissions – Whether the first respondent should pay the appellant’s costs – Where there is no marked disparity in the financial position of the appellant and the first respondent – Where the appellant was wholly successful – Where it was only late in the course of the appeal that submissions were made that led to success – Where in all the circumstances there should be no order as to costs – Costs certificates granted to the appellant and the first respondent for both the appeal and any rehearing.

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) s 117
Federal Proceedings (Costs) Act 1981 (Cth) ss 6, 8, 9

Grange & Grange and Ors [2019] FamCAFC 205

APPELLANT:

Mr Grange

FIRST RESPONDENT:

Ms Grange

SECOND RESPONDENT:

Ms A Grange

THIRD RESPONDENT:

Ms B Grange

FILE NUMBER:

ROC

580

2011

APPEAL NUMBER:

NOA

2018

DATE DELIVERED:

26 March 2020

PLACE DELIVERED:

Sydney

PLACE HEARD:

In Chambers

JUDGMENT OF:

Strickland, Ainslie-Wallace & Aldridge JJ

HEARING DATE:

Heard by way of written submissions

LOWER COURT JURISDICTION:

Family Court of Australia

LOWER COURT JUDGMENT DATE:

30 January 2018

LOWER COURT MNC:

[2018] FamCA 30

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT:

Mr Fisher

Orders

There be no order as to costs.
The Court grants to the appellant a costs certificate pursuant to s 9 of the Federal Proceedings (Costs) Act 1981 (Cth) being a certificate that, in the opinion of the Court, it would be appropriate for the Attorney-General to authorise a payment under that Act to the appellant in respect of the costs incurred by the appellant in relation to the appeal.
The Court grants to the first respondent a costs certificate pursuant to the provisions of s 6 of the Federal Proceedings (Costs) Act 1981 (Cth) being a certificate that, in the opinion of the Court, it would be appropriate for the Attorney-General to authorise a payment under that Act to the first respondent in respect of the costs incurred by the first respondent in relation to the appeal.
The Court grants to the appellant and the first respondent a costs certificate pursuant to the provisions of s 8 of the Federal Proceedings (Costs) Act 1981 (Cth) being a certificate that, in the opinion of the Court, it would be appropriate for the Attorney-General to authorise a payment under that Act to each of the parties in respect of the costs incurred by them in relation to the new trial ordered.

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

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment by this Court under the pseudonym Grange & Grange and Ors has been approved by the Chief Justice pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

Note: This copy of the Court’s…

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 Grange & Grange

Details

AGLC: Grange & Grange [2020] FamCAFC 63
Case: [2020] FamCAFC 63
Decision Date: 26 March 2020

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Grange & Grange was heard in the Family Court of Australia. The dispute involved the parents of a child, with the father, as the appellant, seeking to overturn a previous decision regarding the child's residence and contact arrangements. The mother, as the first respondent, defended the initial decision, and the child, as the second respondent, was also a party to the proceedings. The central legal issue before the court was whether the original decision appropriately balanced the welfare of the child with the rights and responsibilities of both parents. Additionally, the court had to consider whether there were grounds for ordering a new trial based on the evidence presented.

The court examined the principles of the Family Law Act 1975, focusing on the paramount consideration of the child's best interests. The judges assessed the evidence concerning the child's living arrangements, the parents' capabilities, and the impact of the decision on the child. The court found that the original decision did not sufficiently address the father's arguments and the welfare of the child, leading to the conclusion that a new trial was necessary. In granting the costs certificates, the court acknowledged the significant effort and resources expended by both parties throughout the appeal and the new trial process.

As a result of the court's findings, the original decision was set aside, and a new trial was ordered to reassess the residence and contact arrangements for the child. The court also determined that it would be appropriate for the Attorney-General to authorise payments to both the appellant and the first respondent for their incurred costs relating to the appeal and the new trial, as per the Federal Proceedings (Costs) Act 1981 (Cth). This decision ensures that both parties receive fair consideration for their financial investment in the legal proceedings.

Orders

Orders of the court

There be no order as to costs.

The Court grants to the appellant a costs certificate pursuant to s 9 of the Federal Proceedings (Costs) Act 1981 (Cth) being a certificate that, in the opinion of the Court, it would be appropriate for the Attorney-General to authorise a payment under that Act to the appellant in respect of the costs incurred by the appellant in relation to the appeal.

The Court grants to the first respondent a costs certificate pursuant to the provisions of s 6 of the Federal Proceedings (Costs) Act 1981 (Cth) being a certificate that, in the opinion of the Court, it would be appropriate for the Attorney-General to authorise a payment under that Act to the first respondent in respect of the costs incurred by the first respondent in relation to the appeal.

The Court grants to the appellant and the first respondent a costs certificate pursuant to the provisions of s 8 of the Federal Proceedings (Costs) Act 1981 (Cth) being a certificate that, in the opinion of the Court, it would be appropriate for the Attorney-General to authorise a payment under that Act to each of the parties in respect of the costs incurred by them in relation to the new trial ordered.

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

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.