HODGES & MANCINI (No.2)

In the matter of *Hodges & Mancini (No.2)*, Judge Neville of the Family Court of Australia considered an application for costs following property orders. The dispute concerned the respondent's application filed on 22 August 2013.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the respondent should be ordered to pay the applicant's costs, or if each party should bear their own costs, in relation to the respondent's application. This required the court to assess the circumstances surrounding the application and determine if there was any basis for departing from the usual rule that costs follow the event.

Judge Neville reasoned that the respondent's application was likely to be futile. In light of this futility, the court determined that it was not appropriate to order the respondent to pay the applicant's costs. Instead, the court ordered that each party should bear their own costs of and incidental to the application.