Kertz and Kertz

In *Kertz and Kertz*, the Full Court of the Family Court of Australia considered an appeal concerning costs orders made in family law proceedings. The dispute revolved around the wife's liability for the husband's costs incurred during specific periods of the hearing and in relation to a costs application.

The primary legal issues before the Full Court were whether the primary judge erred in ordering the wife to pay one-third of the husband's costs of the hearing from 2 March 2009 until the conclusion of the trial, and whether the primary judge erred in ordering the wife to pay one-half of the husband's costs application. The Court also considered the order regarding the husband's application to extend the time for filing his costs application.

The Full Court found that the primary judge had not erred in making the costs orders. The Court applied the principles of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) regarding costs, which generally allow for discretion to be exercised based on the circumstances of the case. The Court reasoned that the primary judge's decision reflected a proper exercise of discretion, taking into account the conduct of the parties and the progression of the proceedings.

The Full Court upheld the orders of the primary judge. Accordingly, the wife was ordered to pay one-third of the husband’s costs of the hearing from 2 March 2009 until the conclusion of the trial, and one-half of the husband’s costs application. There was no order for costs in relation to the husband’s application to extend the time for filing the costs application.