FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
(DIVISION 2)
Nardo & Acuna [2024] FedCFamC2F 772
File number: CAC 1488 of 2022 Judgment of: JUDGE NEWBRUN Date of judgment: 18 June 2024 Catchwords: FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Costs. Legislation: Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) s 117
Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth) r 12.17
Cases cited: Colgate-Palmolive Company v Cussons Pty Limited (1993) 46 FCR 225
Hawkins & Roe [2012] FamCAFC 77
Joyce & Fante [2013] FamCAFC 141
Division: Division 2 Family Law Number of paragraphs: 27 Date of last submission/s: 13 June 2024 Date of hearing: 27 May 2024 Place: Parramatta Counsel for the Applicant: Ms Bateman Solicitor for the Applicant: Christina Lam & Associates Solicitor for the Respondent: Godden Lawyers Counsel for the Independent Children's Lawyer: Ms Yu Solicitor for the Independent Children's Lawyer: Mahony Family Lawyers ORDERS
CAC 1488 of 2022 FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 2)
BETWEEN: MR NARDO
Applicant
AND: MS ACUNA
Respondent
INDEPENDENT CHILDREN'S LAWYER
ORDER MADE BY:
JUDGE NEWBRUN
DATE OF ORDER:
18 JUNE 2024
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.The father pay the mother’s costs fixed in the sum of $9,000 within 8 months.
2.The ICL’s costs application is dismissed.
Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry in the Court’s records.
Note: This copy of the Court’s Reasons for judgment may be subject to review to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors (r 10.14(b) Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 10.13 Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth).
Part XIVB of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) makes it an offence, except in very limited circumstances, to publish an account of proceedings that identify persons, associated persons, or witnesses involved in family law proceedings.
IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment by this Court under a pseudonym has been approved pursuant to subsection 114Q(2) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
JUDGE NEWBRUN:
This is the determination of:
(a)The mother’s oral application that the father pay her costs of the proceedings;
(b)The ICL’s oral application that the mother and father equally share her costs in the amount of $3,971 each or, in the alternative, that the father pay the entirety of the ICL’s costs in the amount of $7,942.
The mother seeks an order that the father pay her costs for trial preparation and attendance on an indemnity basis. In the alternative she seeks costs calculated in accordance with Schedule 3 of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (“the Division 1 scale”).
The father opposes the mother’s application for costs. The father submits that each party should pay their own costs arising from the proceedings.
At the start of the hearing, the Independent Children’s Lawyer (“ICL”) sought costs in the total sum of $7,942 to be…
Continue reading Nardo & Acuna
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Nardo & Acuna [2024] FedCFamC2F 772
- Case
- [2024] FedCFamC2F 772
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issue before the court was the allocation of costs between the parties and the consideration of the ICL's costs application. The court had to decide whether the ICL's application for costs should be granted and, if so, in what amount. Additionally, the court needed to determine the appropriate costs to be borne by Mr Nardo, if any, in relation to the proceedings.
Judge Newbrun considered the submissions made by both parties and the ICL. The judge examined the conduct of the parties during the proceedings and the necessity of the ICL's involvement. The court concluded that while the ICL's role was crucial, the specific costs sought were not justified given the circumstances of the case. The court found that the mother's costs were reasonable and necessary, and ordered the father to pay $9,000 within eight months. The ICL's costs application was dismissed.
The court's orders mandated that Mr Nardo pay $9,000 towards Ms Acuna's costs within eight months. The ICL's costs application was dismissed, and no costs were awarded to the ICL. These orders reflect the court's assessment of the proceedings and the respective responsibilities of the parties involved.
Orders
Orders of the court
CAC 1488 of 2022
FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 2)
BETWEEN:
MR NARDO
Applicant
AND:
MS ACUNA
Respondent
INDEPENDENT CHILDREN'S LAWYER
ORDER MADE BY:
JUDGE NEWBRUN
DATE OF ORDER:
18 JUNE 2024
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The father pay the mother’s costs fixed in the sum of $9,000 within 8 months.
2. The ICL’s costs application is dismissed.
Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry in the Court’s records.
Note: This copy of the Court’s Reasons for judgment may be subject to review to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors (r 10.14(b) Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 10.13 Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth).
Part XIVB of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) makes it an offence, except in very limited circumstances, to publish an account of proceedings that identify persons, associated persons, or witnesses involved in family law proceedings.
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.