Hassen & Mawad (No 2)

[2024] FedCFamC1A 195

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

(DIVISION 1) APPELLATE JURISDICTION

Hassen & Mawad (No 2) [2024] FedCFamC1A 195  

Appeal from:

Mawad & Hassen (No 2) [2024] FedCFamC2F 356

Appeal number:

NAA 112 of 2024

File number:

PAC 3649 of 2019

Judgment of:

CHRISTIE J

Date of judgment:

22 October 2024

Catchwords:

FAMILY LAW – APPEAL – COSTS – Where the appeal was wholly unsuccessful – Where respondent sought costs of the appeal – Applicant to pay respondent’s costs of the appeal in a fixed sum.  

Legislation:

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) s 117

Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth) 13.53

Number of paragraphs:

6

Date of hearing:

10 October 2024

Place:

Sydney

Counsel for the Appellant:

Mr Mathews

Solicitor for the Appellant:

Berry Family Law

Counsel for the Respondent:

Ms Dart

Solicitor for the Respondent:

Sydney Central Family Law

Solicitor for the Independent Children's Lawyer:

Harb Lawyers (Did not participate)

ORDERS

NAA 112 of 2024
PAC 3649 of 2019

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
DIVISION 1 APPELLATE JURISDICTION

BETWEEN:

MR HASSEN

Appellant

AND:

MS MAWAD

Respondent

INDEPENDENT CHILDREN'S LAWYER

ORDER MADE BY:	CHRISTIE J
DATE OF ORDER:	22 OCTOBER 2024

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The appellant pay the respondent’s costs in the sum of $6,969.60.

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).

Part XIVB of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) makes it an offence, except in very limited circumstances, to publish an account of 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 Hassen & Mawad has been approved pursuant to subsection 114Q(2) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

CHRISTIE J

1. The respondent sought costs in the event the appeal was dismissed.

2. The appellant acknowledged that if he were unsuccessful then in the ordinary course, an order for costs would follow. This arises from the operation of s 117(2A)(e) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) (“the Act”).

3. The appeal has been dismissed and the appellant has been wholly unsuccessful. This enlivens the jurisdiction to depart from the principle in s 117(1) of the Act. I find there are justifying circumstances.

4. The respondent was legally aided. Her lawyers filed a costs schedule in accordance with r 13.53(2) of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth). That schedule set out the costs incurred in the sum of $6,969.60.

5. The respondent made no submissions about quantum, which, in the all the circumstances, is reasonable. The schedule makes plain that the fees were calculated in accordance with the Legal Aid scale of costs.

6. It is just in this case that the appellant meet the costs of the respondent and I will so order in the sum sought.

I certify that the preceding six (6) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment of the Honourable Justice Christie.

Associate:

Dated:       22 October 2024