LANIGA & CARRON (No.2)

In *Laniga & Carron (No.2)*, the Family Court of Australia considered an application for costs following property proceedings. The wife had made numerous offers to settle throughout the litigation, all of which were less than the final amount ultimately ordered to be paid to her. The husband, who was self-represented, found himself overwhelmed by the proceedings.

The central legal issue before the court was the appropriate order for costs, specifically whether the husband should be ordered to pay the wife's costs, and if so, from what point in time. This involved assessing the conduct of the parties in relation to settlement offers and the overall progression of the litigation.

Judge Egan reasoned that the wife's consistent offers to settle, which were ultimately more favourable to her than the final outcome, demonstrated a genuine attempt to resolve the matter efficiently. Conversely, the husband's rejection of these offers, coupled with his self-represented status and apparent overwhelm, weighed against him. The court applied the principle that costs orders can reflect the conduct of parties in settlement negotiations, particularly where one party has made reasonable offers that were not accepted. Consequently, the court ordered the husband to pay the wife's costs of and incidental to the property proceeding and the application for costs, to be assessed on a party and party basis on the Family Court Scale, from 29 April 2016, the date of the wife's first offer to settle.