Hill v Hill

In *Hill v Hill*, Justice O’Reilly considered an application by the wife for a review of orders made by Registrar Stevens on 5 September 2007. The husband also filed an application on 26 July 2007. The proceedings involved a dispute over costs orders previously made by Coleman J on 14 December 2006.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether to extend the time for the wife to file her review application, whether to set aside the Registrar's orders of 5 September 2007, and whether to extend the time for the husband to serve itemised costs accounts related to the earlier costs order. The court also had to determine the costs of the husband's application and the wife's review application.

Justice O’Reilly, by consent of the parties, extended the time for the wife to file her review application and set aside the Registrar's orders of 5 September 2007. The court also extended the time for the husband to serve three itemised costs accounts, deeming them served on 1 November 2007 for the purposes of the Family Law Rules 2004, which would then trigger the timeframes for disputing those accounts. The husband was ordered to pay the wife's costs of his application, to be assessed and set off against the costs the wife was to pay him under the previous order of Coleman J. No order was made as to the costs of the wife's review application.