Kerson & Blake (No. 3)

In *Kerson & Blake (No. 3)*, Baumann J of the Family Court of Australia considered an application by the father for costs against the mother. The dispute arose from the mother's successful application for a late adjournment of the trial in 2019, with the father seeking to recover the costs incurred as a result of this adjournment.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether circumstances existed that justified an order for costs against the mother, pursuant to section 117(2A) of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). This required the Court to consider various factors, including the financial positions of the parties, whether either party was in receipt of legal aid, and the conduct of the parties.

Baumann J noted the general rule that parties bear their own costs but found that the mother's conduct in seeking a late adjournment, after the father had prepared for trial, constituted a circumstance justifying an order for costs. The Court considered the mother's affidavit, which indicated her financial difficulties and a desire to settle, but also her subsequent active pursuit of orders for the children to reside with her. The Court found that the mother's position regarding residence had been inconsistent, and that her assertion of being misled by her former solicitors could not be determined without the solicitors having an opportunity to be heard.

The Court ordered that the mother pay a contribution to the father's costs in the sum of $5,000. Additionally, upon the father providing evidence of having incurred and paid fees for counsel in the sum of $7,892.50, the mother was to pay this sum to the father within sixty days of receiving such evidence.