Leventis and Leventis (No 2)

In *Leventis & Leventis (No. 2)* [2021] FamCA 256, the Family Court of Australia considered an application for costs made by the fourth and fifth respondents. The applicant, Ms. Leventis, had initiated proceedings against her husband, Mr. Leventis, and later joined the fourth and fifth respondents, Ms. Krol and Mr. Krol, as parties. The proceeding against the fourth and fifth respondents was subsequently discontinued, and the question of their costs was reserved.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether the fourth and fifth respondents were entitled to an order for costs against the applicant, pursuant to section 117 of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). This required the Court to determine if the circumstances warranted a costs order beyond the general rule that parties bear their own costs, and specifically, whether any of the exceptions outlined in section 117(2A) were enlivened, making such an order just.

Justice Wilson found that the fourth and fifth respondents had sought their own joinder as parties to the litigation, asserting a beneficial interest in certain trust assets and a jointly purchased property. However, the Court noted that the applicant had not sought any property orders against them, and their involvement appeared to be primarily as witnesses of fact rather than parties with a distinct interest to agitate. Crucially, the fourth and fifth respondents failed to adduce any evidence to support their costs application, and submissions in support were made by other respondents. The Court concluded that none of the circumstances under section 117(2A) were met, and it would not be just to make a costs order in their favour. Consequently, the application for costs by the fourth and fifth respondents was dismissed, with their costs to be borne by themselves.