Milliford and Milliford

Case [2019] FamCA 128


FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

MILLIFORD & MILLIFORD [2019] FamCA 128
FAMILY LAW – COSTS – Where the husband sought indemnity costs against the solicitor for the wife – Where the wife had sought a declaration that a divorce order and property orders settled by consent in 1998 were improperly obtained – Where the wife was wholly unsuccessful in her application – Where the conduct of the solicitor did not amount to a “serious dereliction of duty” – Application for indemnity costs dismissed.
Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) s 117(2A).
Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth) r 19.10, 19.11, 19.18
Prantage & Prantage [2013] FamCAFC 105
Colgate-Palmolive Co v Cussons Pty Limited (1993) 118 ALR 248
Re Wilcox, Ex parte Venture Industries Pty Ltd (1996) 72 FCR 151
Hand & Bodilly [2013] FamCAFC 98
Australian Transport Insurance Pty Ltd & Anor v Graeme Phillips Road Transport Insurance Pty Ltd& Ors (1986) 71 ALR 287
Fountain Selected Meats (Sales) Pty Ltd v International Produce Merchants Ltd & Ors (1988) 81 ALR 397
Jachimowicz & Jachimowicz (1986) 10 Fam LR 566
APPLICANT: Ms Milliford
RESPONDENT: Mr Milliford
SECOND RESPONDENT: Mr Thomas
FILE NUMBER: SYF 6832 of 1998
DATE DELIVERED: 11 March 2019
PLACE DELIVERED: Sydney
PLACE HEARD: Sydney
JUDGMENT OF: Rees J
HEARING DATE: 17 January 2019

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: Mr Valentin
SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT: W Lawyers
SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT: Young and Muggleton Lawyers
COUNSEL FOR THE 2ND RESPONDENT: Mr Valentin
SOLICITOR FOR THE 2ND RESPONDENT: Mullane & Lindsay Solicitors

Orders

IT IS ORDERED

  1. That the husband’s application that the wife’s solicitor pay the costs in relation to the application filed 26 July 2017 be dismissed.

  2. That the husband’s application that the wife’s solicitor pay the costs in relation to the application filed 13 February 2018 be dismissed.

Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry of the order in the Court’s records.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment by this Court under the pseudonym Milliford & Milliford has been approved by the Chief Justice pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

Note: This copy of the Court’s Reasons for Judgment may be subject to review to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors (r 17.02A(b) of the Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 17.02 Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth).

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT SYDNEY

FILE NUMBER: SYF 6832 of 1998

Ms Milliford

Applicant

And

Mr Milliford

Respondent

And

Mr Thomas

Second Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

  1. Ms Milliford (“the wife”) and Mr Milliford (“the husband”) married in 1994. A decree nisi of dissolution of the marriage was pronounced in July 1999 and became absolute in August 1999.

  2. Consent orders for property settlement were made by the Family Court of Australia on 10 August 1998.

  3. Proceedings were instituted by the wife, acting for herself, by an Initiating Application filed on 6 June 2017 where she sought orders to…

Continue reading Milliford and Milliford

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Milliford and Milliford [2019] FamCA 128
Case
[2019] FamCA 128
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of *Milliford and Milliford*, heard before Rees J, the husband sought orders that the wife's solicitor be required to pay the costs of two specific applications filed by the husband on 26 July 2017 and 13 February 2018.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the wife's solicitor should be held personally liable for the costs incurred by the husband in relation to these two applications.

Rees J dismissed both of the husband's applications. The reasons for this dismissal are not detailed in the provided text, but the outcome indicates that the court found no grounds to order the wife's solicitor to pay the costs of the husband's applications.

Orders

Orders of the court

IT IS ORDERED

1.

That the husband’s application that the wife’s solicitor pay the costs in relation to the application filed 26 July 2017 be dismissed.

2.

That the husband’s application that the wife’s solicitor pay the costs in relation to the application filed 13 February 2018 be dismissed.

Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry of the order in the Court’s records.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.