Malcher & Malcher (No 2)

In *Malcher & Malcher (No 2)*, the father applied to vary interim parenting orders that had been made only two weeks prior. The mother contended that the father's application constituted an abuse of process. The court was required to determine whether the father's application was indeed an abuse of process and, if so, whether the mother was entitled to an order for indemnity costs.

The court found that the father's application did constitute an abuse of process. In reaching this conclusion, the court considered the principles governing the proper use of court processes and the need to prevent vexatious or repetitive litigation. The court then considered the mother's application for costs on an indemnity basis, given the father's complete lack of success in his interim application. The court had regard to section 117(2A) of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) in determining whether the dismissal of the father's application on the grounds of abuse of process warranted an order for indemnity costs.

The court ordered that the father's application be dismissed. Furthermore, the father was ordered to pay the mother's costs of that application on an indemnity basis in the sum of $6,000.00, to be paid within twenty-eight days. The court also noted that the parties would provide written undertakings to each other that the children would not be removed from the Commonwealth of Australia without the prior written consent of the other party.